Avoiding the dreaded infodump

[Vandal]

I'm nearing the end of my WIP and I have yet to resolve some of the important plot points. I found myself falling into the infodump trap as sort of an easy way out in as few cases.

I want to keep the action moving (this is, after all, the thrilling conclusion) without rambling explanations and such.

I'm curious to know how some of you have handled this. What are some good alternatives if I start to smell infodump?

Thanks.

[FredCharles]

I spaced my info dumps out throughout my novel in small sections. The novel is primarly action over a few short days, so it was hard to figure the infofdump in.

It really depends on your story, and the nature of info that you need to dispesnse. My infodump was world info that most of the characters already should have known. The challenge was clueing in the reader.

[ChaosTitan]

Are you talking about infodumps such as : Jack later found out that Tony had successfully defused the nuclear device planted beneath the President's Los Angeles Bunker. With that information under his belt, Jack called around to the rest of his team, discovering with each call that Morena was in custody, the Farelly brothers were suspended from duty pending further investigation, and the plot to assassinate the head of FOX studios was thwarted. Now all Jack had to worry about was that guy holding everyone hostage at the Anaheim Pond.

That sort of infodump to tie up plot points? Don't do it if you can avoid it. It's not exactly compelling.

Important plot points should be tied up, as often as possible, in the story. Sometimes one action ties up several points, and if you can manage that, do it.

[ccarver30]

What about domino effects though? In my story, one fact leads to another which leads to another. :poke:

[ClaudiaGray]

Info dumps are incredibly tough. Sometimes there is simply no plotting around them, but nothing brings the story crashing to a halt like a two-page explanation. I wish I had a "solution" to offer, but in my personal experience, you have to work this out differently every single time.

The one general principle I try to use every time I work this out is: Make sure the info dump isn't the only thing going on. I know this sounds counterintuitive -- haven't you got enough in this scene with all this explanation? But I find it helps. In the book I just finished, I set the bulk of the explaning during a very suspenseful moment, when the characters are in danger and can't really do anything but wait. They're talking not just to share information, but also to keep themselves from panicking, and I think that kept the scene tight. In a novel-length fanfic I wrote, I had the "confession" come from a father just after his estranged daughter finally told him she was expecting a baby; it made him emotionally open where he usually was not and highlighted how this explanation was not just about clearing things up for the reader -- it was about bringing these two characters together again as a team and as a family. I think having that other element, the one that connects to the characters personally, really helps enliven the otherwise soul-killing infodump.

[ccarver30]

Claudia-
As usual, this helps me. :)
In my book, you kind of find out B but you don't know how B could be... then A comes strolling in to explain- if that makes any sense. LOL
I think even though I feel like it is an infodump (I am new to this word), the two have to go hand in hand... I think...

[ProserpinaFC]

Right now, I am writing a scene where the 5 chief leaders (Advisors) of an empire are having an emergency meeting to discuss the strained relationship between two factions in their empire: the Sounen Returnists and the Tributes, with their sympathizers.

The Returnists' media has reported that the Tributes on Earth are spreading an untreatable disease and the Advisor over them is covering it up. Two of the other Advisors are suspicious that is exactly what she is trying to do (they are sorta right) and they are drilling her for answers.

Now, this meeting is a big infodump, placed neatly in the 4th chapter of my story, after a great deal of events have already happened, including scenes of Returnists and Tributes roughing it up.

I tend to rant, and I want a short meeting! How-- umm.... help. @_______@
(I should make a mini-outline.... Yessss...)

[preyer]

you're 'allowed' one, two at most, sentence here and there. not that there's a formula for this i'm aware of, but my advice is keep it scant. also, you'll usually want to put your infodumps in the set-up/act one. that's not always possible, of course, but character-wise this shouldn't be a problem. there may be something about the character you want to reveal later that requires a little background information, though offhand i'd say that's part of your set-up, too.

a lot of people put their infodumps in a prologue. hence, you have a lot of people skipping the prologue. newbies in particular like prologues as a way to get out a lot of exposition and get on with the story without quite understanding you can show the backstory in a variety of ways.

therein lies, imo, an important trick to remember: show as much of your backstory as you can instead of telling the reader a history lesson. make no mistake, showing takes up a lot of words, but it also can lead to some interesting scenes.

by far i think the most popular method of hiding info-dumps is through dialogue. your character may come to a place or find an object that they're unfamiliar with. that's when the wizened old mentor comes in handy, to explain that to the character and thus to the reader. that's when the person under investigation finds a clue that will help her prove her innocence and must rely on her non-sexual b/f who's whiz-bang at cracking codes to 'see what he can do.' note that after these guys' practical usefulness is spent, they're often killed off.

then there's (and i hate doing this as much as i hate reading it) gathering 'round the campfire and listening to the old man tell tales. it could be dad at the dinner table or a femme fatale in the private dic's office (which would only be part of the real story, mind you). it could be a killer's confession. basically any extended chunk of dialogue that explains things away. it even extends into watching a t.v. show or corporate sales pitch on DVD. believe me, it's always obvious, but.... for what it's worth, i'd rather see the campfire version over the prologue.

if you're able to recognize your infodumps, see if you can 'show' them away first and dialogue/conversation them out second. that's my knee-jerk advice, anyway, you're welcome to disgard it. (remember, if you go the dialogue way to not do the 'well, bob, as you know...' thing, for example, 'well, bob, as you know you're married to my sister and you're working for a robotics firm.' gee, ya think bob knows who his wife is and where he works?) try to see if it's too much at once ~ like i said, you can get away with a little bit here and there.

also, if possible, combine some of the character's backstory into the infodump. then dump that into a bit of dialogue if you have to.

'i used to be a ranger in these parts. these ruins... they are cursed.'

'you were a ranger? i knew it! what happened? i thought rangers were for life.'

'they are. unless you're caught with a girl who said she was 18, but... wasn't.'

remember the line in 'star wars' where obi-wan and luke are on the bluff overlooking mos eisley? 'mos eisley spaceport. you'll not find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. we must be cautious.' man, what a great infodump, huh? you know about the spaceport and you know that obi-wan has been there before, adding a bit to his character. plus, it's just a way cool couple of lines. in fiction form, beyond the description there's nothing more to add as evidence of what obi-wan said ('showing' how bad the place is) is forthcoming in the cantina scene.

bopping to another movie, remember the first time you watched 'raiders of the lost ark'? remember indy explaining to the g-men about the ark's history while at the college? did you understand the first blessed thing about what he was saying? i sure as hell didn't. not that it mattered, it was so entertaining to watch. in fiction, though, i probably would have tried to find a way around this scene (although ultimately it's so perfect it's hard to improve on that). i mean, could you take any bit of advice here and do that scene any better? i couldn't.

don't let me mislead you: sometimes an infodump conversation can be just the trick to use. two old women sitting around a pond, staring at the ruins of a roller coaster across the water. martha says, 'remember when the park had amusement rides?' agnes nods, 'they used to have the most gut-wrenching hot dogs.' 'yes, but if i recall, you made glenn practically spend his paycheck on them for you.' 'they made me sick, but they were the only thing even slightly edible.' 'not to mention you had a crush on the cashier. i wonder what ever happened to him?' 'he was in glenn's regiment in the war. he died storming some little hamlet in austria. i remember glenn saying so in a letter. the last letter i ever got from him. no one ever said where glenn was killed.' 'oh, yes, now i remember. poor boys.' 'you know, i never told scott about gleen.' 'you didn't? why?' 'i don't know. i think because scott couldn't fight he never had a chance to be a hero. i don't want him thinking that i had a soldier hero in my past that i thought of. it's funny, martha, i can still picture glenn's face to this day, yet i can hardly remember scott's.'

okay, that sucked. sorry for boring you. but, hey, at least it was put into a single crappy paragraph. someone may find that interesting, and it may be, i dunno, but i think it says a few things about the characters and their lives and surroundings that could have been pure infodumping and probably far less interesting (assuming this off-the-cuff example has any interesting aspects to it, lol).

flashbacks can also be used to hide infodumps. i should say 'hide' because i find a lot of flashbacks are used no better than prologues, just ways to drop in backstory for lack of a better alternative.

i'll have to think of some more. this is where specific examples that you have would come in handy.

[wayndom]

The absolute best way to deal with infodumps is to ALWAYS consider dumping them first.

That is, just cut them out. Period. Then put the work down for a while, and re-read it to see if it really needed the info after all.

I've told this story a few times here, but it's so valuable, it bears repeating:

On the director's cut of Terminator2, James Cameron notes that the difference between it and the studio-edited theatrical release is that his original version has about ten to fifteen minutes of scenes that explain how the second Terminator differs from the first, how it is that he can learn and grow from his experiences, etc., all of which seemed absolutely necessary for the film to make sense.

Then Cameron admits that after seeing the studio-edited version, he realized it's superior to his uncut version(!). "It's a lesson in how little information is necessary to tell a story." (Paraphrasing here) All that stuff he thought was vitally necessary turned out to be disposable.

When I'm re-writing and I find something that doesn't seem to work, I always first try removing it, with nothing added to take its place, and about 90% of the time, I find that's all that was needed; the work reads more easily, smoothly, and looks more professional.

One of the big dividers between published authors and wanna-be's is the willingness to "kill your babies" during re-writes.

[Lolly]

In TV it's known as "the cabbagehead"--the innocent character who asks the question so that the expert character can explain it for the viewer (reader). I believe the term was coined for Star Trek.

Counselor Troi: "So, Geordi, how does that transporter doo-dad work?"

LaForge: "Well, since you asked..."

Tolkien also used this to good effect in Fellowship. Maybe you could follow his lead, Vandal. Have a younger character who's not quite up to speed on things so that the elders have to explain it.

[wayndom]

In TV it's known as "the cabbagehead"--the innocent character who asks the question so that the expert character can explain it for the viewer (reader). I believe the term was coined for Star Trek.

Counselor Troi: "So, Geordi, how does that transporter doo-dad work?"

LaForge: "Well, since you asked..."


Star Trek New Generation used a reverse form of this, in an episode where they went back in time and met Captain Kirk (in footage from the original show). At one point, the NG cast is eating with Worf, when one notes that the other Klingons (who belong to the earlier time) don't have any ridges on their foreheads. They turn to Worf and ask him what happened, and after a moment of snorting, he says, "We do not discuss it with outsiders."

[Paichka]

They turn to Worf and ask him what happened, and after a moment of snorting, he says, "We do not discuss it with outsiders."

Quoted because that's always been my favorite part of any Star Trek episode, ever.

I am the undisputed Grand High Poohbah of Infodumping. So what I do, is I just write the way I want to. In my first draft, I have PAGES of exposition, thousands of words of useless backstory, and huuuuuuuuge unbroken paragraphs of glorious infodumping.

Then, in the rewrite, I go through and slash most of it. Then my Beta catches the rest, and I perform more surgery. I save ALL earlier drafts of the story though, so that if I find a place where the backstory works, I can reinsert it.

[blacbird]

I'm nearing the end of my WIP and I have yet to resolve some of the important plot points. I found myself falling into the infodump trap as sort of an easy way out in as few cases.

The first thing to think of is: Do you need any of this "information", or "resolution of plot points"? I can't answer that in a vacuum, lacking more specifics of your WIP, but never underestimate the ability of readers to fill in blanks. That is, in fact, one of the great joys of reading, for many readers. Too much explanation is as bad as too little. Probably the best way to get a handle on it is to find a good beta reader or two, and (without front-loading the question), see if they have any confusions.

"When in doubt, leave it out," is not a bad premise.

caw

[TPCSWR]

In my current story I have a character who doesn't know about the whole situation that the MC is involved in, so he has to explain it to her, therefore explaining it to the reader. It's done early on though, so it may not work for you.

[JoNightshade]

If it's at the END of your narrative, rather than the beginning, I'm wondering exactly what it is you need to dump.

1) Are you telling us what happened to a character after the action in the story takes place? If so, you can cut this. Or just give a hint or two.

2) Are you trying to resolve a critical plot point? If so, it should probably be a scene of its own.

I dunno if this helps but in my novel I have a specific gun that passes from hand to hand. It's pretty important, but I never resolve what happens to it in the end. The last it's specifically mentioned, one character takes it and puts it away on a shelf. But then in the epilogue I have a character who does not normally carry a weapon "adjust his holster." This is probably going to go unnoticed by most people, but if anyone is anal enough to need to know where that gun went, that's going to clue them in.

[blacbird]

If it's at the END of your narrative, rather than the beginning, I'm wondering exactly what it is you need to dump.

Yeah. My point exactly.

Why are so many other people here able to express what I'm thinking in so many fewer and better words? Does this help explain my incompetence at this writing endeavor?

And, how stupid is the qualifying phrase, just expressed above, "many fewer"?

caw

[GerriB]

Star Trek New Generation used a reverse form of this, in an episode where they went back in time and met Captain Kirk (in footage from the original show). At one point, the NG cast is eating with Worf, when one notes that the other Klingons (who belong to the earlier time) don't have any ridges on their foreheads. They turn to Worf and ask him what happened, and after a moment of snorting, he says, "We do not discuss it with outsiders."

Just to be picky....

This was from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. :)

I solve infodumps by tying the information to action or by having a reason for the character to follow that thought pattern. I had an admiral filling in a captain about the current political situation, and that gave me a chance to fill in a lot of history in a short amount of space. No one noticed, and all was good.

Basically, justify the need for the information, and go from there.

[Ruv Draba]

I'm nearing the end of my WIP and I have yet to resolve some of the important plot points.

Here's a checklist that may help. I've tried to arrange the questions and suggestions in order of simplicity and benefit to your story.

1. Is part it a major through-line?
It's part of a major through-line if it either changes a major character or messes with the major character's stakes so that the character has to do something difficult, risky or dangerous. (If you're not sure who your major characters are, look for the protagonists, antagonists and anyone whose actions seriously help or hinder them. These guys drive your story.)

If it's not part of a major through-line, then try and ditch it. Simplify the explanations; don't explain what you don't have to. If you must, knock out some of the consequences and replace them with something simpler; you'll often get a better story.

But if part of a major through-line or if it's really, really the only way ahead then move to step 2.

2. Do you have a viewpoint character at the event?
A viewpoint character (VC) is any character that the narration can follow. If you're using a third person omniscient narrator, then every character is a possible viewpoint character. If it's limited third person or first person then it's usually just some of the characters (often the major ones, and often only one of them).
If you have a VC you can use for the scene then cut to it witnessing the event; have them tell whomever you need to tell (or leak the info some other way) and you're done. Else move to step 3.

3. Can you contrive that a viewpoint character know it?(You are here: :poke:)
Can you capture a VC to witness it? Can the VC have a dream or an oracle? Access a document? Overhear a conversation? Can the VC infer it? Can a captured minion report it under interrogation?

This seemed to be where you were at in your post, Vandal. It's what cinema-writers sometimes call 'laying pipe' - info that sets up a critical future scene on a major character's throughline. The trick is to try and lay pipe in either an action scene or a reaction scene. Can you slip the information in while the character is doing something else? Make it a really inappropriate time: Disarming a bomb; Having an argument; Worrying about a sick pet; Making out with a hotty for the first time. This way it can work to distract the character, and even add tension as the character tries to cope with two things at once.

[Since you're at the end of your WIP, resolving all your plot points there can look awful cheesy. See if you can seed hints (or just outright reveal it) as early as possible without killing tension. Slipping things in while a VC is distracted might help.]

If yes, rejig your story so a VC can see it. Else, move to 4.

4. Can you tell the reader at least?
Can you quote a document or a witness at the start of a chapter? Could it go in an epilogue? If so, do so -- characters can even quote documents and sources in the story sometimes. If not, go to 5.

5. You need a new viewpoint character
Sorry, but this is my last idea. A new viewpoint character will definitely solve this problem, but it usually takes a fair whack of redesign and/or rewrite to make it work.

With luck the new viewpoint character will be one of your major characters - or someone who hangs with them. If you're really, really unlucky then it'll be some new character and you'll have to invent things for them to see, worry about and do. (But hopefully nobody gets that unlucky:cry:)

But hopefully, you're not here but somewhere further back up. The earlier options tend to be the easiest and the best. If you are then there's just a bit of scene rewriting to do.

Hope these help. If it works and you make millions, please remember me! :e2writer:

[Linda Adams]

I try to avoid info dumps by adding as part of the context of something happening in a scene or even as part of the conflict with another character. In one scene, instead of explaining a piece of backstory, I have two characters get into a fight over it because the one character didn't do something earlier that he should have.

[Miguelito]

Just to be picky....

This was from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. :)

To be pickier, and geekier, they eventually answered the question on Enterprise.

[Vandal]

Wow, this thread sure found some legs.

Thanks for your input, everyone. I think I handled the issue quite well on Novel 1. I hope for the same success on Novel 2.

[preyer]

'The absolute best way to deal with infodumps is to ALWAYS consider dumping them first.' ~ agreed. until you get to know how you write (and equalling important: what the reader is willing to put up with), you'll simply have to experiment and do some research (some people take a highlighter to a book and search out specific writing methods). but, absolutely, try it without the infodump.

'One of the big dividers between published authors and wanna-be's is the willingness to "kill your babies" during re-writes.' ~ i've always said the difference between a pro and a good amateur is their editing ability.

a quick note about infodumping and t.v. shows: shows like 'star trek' need a quick infodump, found in two places in 'ST's case. the first is the captain's log, and the second is once communication is established with the planet they're visiting or they've met someone on the surface. there can be some variation on the second one, but if you'll watch, i can't think of an original episode (and probably most of the ST:TNG) that didn't have this formula. just wanted to put the idea out there that for t.v. in particular there are formulas like this which exist because of the time limitations. not quite an issue with a novel.

for an example of laying too much 'pipe,' go no further than 'minority report.' it's got a huge, about forty minutes, amount of pipe. i think writers tend to lay too much 'pipe' in their stories where world-building is involved. i mentioned a few daze ago about showing the society instead of just laying it out in a history lesson and gave a kick ass example. you may remember the first 'national treasure' where there was a history lesson about the family told by the grandfather to a young version of the main character. necessary? kinda. a perfectly executed plot device? hmmm.... well, what you've got to remember with a lot of these movies is that they're 'high concept,' meaning as much four quadrant appeal as possible (the quads correspond with demographics, four being the best). that also means it's probably pretty formulaic when you break it down into act breaks and beats (plot points). there are some pretty specific 'rules' for screenwriting that you break at your own peril when going for mass market. that's why novels can offer so much freedom and, while it's good to know about screenplays, imo, it's valuable not to confuse the two, especially when it comes to the differences of storytelling. anyone who claims there's no difference between novel writing and screenplays, avering that it's all the same storytelling just in a different medium, is probably pretty ignorant of screenwriting (i am, but at least i've *some* clue, enough to know they're not the same blow-by-blow methodology involved). just remember that what works in movies doesn't mean it's going to work in a novel.

ruv's suggestions about a VC are good ones. there's an artful way of making this stuff seem fresh and an obvious and contrived/cliched way. the 'artful' way is, of course, not tipping the reader off as to what you're doing.

one thing that no one mentions is you can put quotes or poems or lyrics in front of your chapters. while i find this increasingly annoying every time i see it, an 'excerpt' from an epic poem in your universe (if you're doing a fantasy) can shed some light on the situation.

please, fantasy writers, i am utterly sick of the MC going into a tavern and being told what's going on. also, where the thief or whatever goes to meet her guild contact and is given the heist specs and we're supposed to pretend we haven't seen it a million times before. it almost never fails that the writer who has magick seeping out of its world's pores can't concoct some interesting things and *still* has his MC going to the same places we've seen in every other story. need some information? ask the wizard to talk to the ghosts and see if they'll recreate the incident. look into a magick ball if nothing else. yes, you certainly can have the MC find a musty journal entry lining the bottom of an old trunk (which is still better than being told what's the deal by the guild contact getting drunk), but, good gravy, man, use the world and situations around the characters to your advantage.

[Chase]

Except for the long infodumps, I enjoyed these posts. Yes, I do think I'm witty.

Thanks for nailing one of my huge problems.

[Sarpedon]

One way to make infodumps more interesting is instead of having the author tell the reader, have one character tell another character, as an anecdote. Then you can get the other characters reactions, as well as illuminating the telling character. Plus, as an added bonus, since you've written it as dialogue instead of an infodump, you'll find it easier to break up into several shorter conversations and asides, which is easier.

And I hate the omniscient tavern people, too. My embrionic fantasy book doesn't even have a thief character. Ok, it does, but his MO is breaking a window, and sticking in a pole with a hook at the end in and grabbing things. (which, incidently was called being a 'hooker' in the old days. The word 'hooker' did not gain its present meaning until 1863) He doesn't know how to pick locks, find and remove traps, move silently, or hide in shadows. In short, more like a real world thief.

[FennelGiraffe]

Is it just me, or is the term infodump getting twisted out of all recognition lately?

Infodump has had a longstanding definition in Fantasy & SF circles. It has always meant background info presented as a large, indigestible lump of exposition. (With some disagreement as to whether As You Know, Bob dialog is a subtype of infodumping, or a separate category.) The term's emphasis is on the method of presentation. The same information, mentioned delicately in small snippets throughout the story, is not an infodump.

Jo Walton, on rec.arts.sf.composition, coined the term incluing to describe the process of scattering background info throughout the story and mentioning details only when they become relevant, but it doesn't seem to have spread outside the traditional SF community. I've suggested the term infosprinkling, while less elegant, might be more memorable as an explicit counterpoint to infodumping.

[Willowmound]

Thank you.

[Lolly]

I try to avoid info dumps by adding as part of the context of something happening in a scene or even as part of the conflict with another character. In one scene, instead of explaining a piece of backstory, I have two characters get into a fight over it because the one character didn't do something earlier that he should have.


That's a great way, too. In my story, the heroine confronts a mysterious religious figure right in the first chapter. The guy tells her that he has summoned her because he wants to atone for her sins. "The blood of your mother is on my hands," he claims. However, rather than slowing down the action to describe the past of this woman and her connection to the priest, I weave it throughout the rest of the story. Hopefully, the reader will be hooked and keep reading in order to put the pieces together.


Another way is to imagine your story as a screenplay. Instead of you, the omnipotent author, explaining the backstory, how can you work it into the dialogue instead? Again, Star Trek was a master of this. I can't remember the name of it (I'm sure my fellow Trekkies will supply it ;)), but I remember the old episode where the Romulans were introduced. Since they were a totally new alien, the writers had to fill in the backstory with just a few lines of dialogue. They succeeded nicely.

Kirk: Who are they?

Spock: The Romulans, Captain.

Kirk: The Romulans! What are they doing in Federation space? We haven't had contact with them in fifty years!

Spock: Indeed, the Federation lost contact with the Romulans after Treaty X established the Neutral Zone between our two regions.

Right away, you know that there was some kind of war between the two groups, which led to the establishment of a de-militarized zone. The fact that they still have a Neutral Zone between them makes you think that the Romulans are potentially hostile, which makes you wonder if this one is going to attack the Enterprise, etc.

[Willowmound]

Kirk: Who are they?

Spock: The Romulans, Captain.

Kirk: The Romulans! What are they doing in Federation space? We haven't had contact with them in fifty years!

Spock: Indeed, the Federation lost contact with the Romulans after Treaty X established the Neutral Zone between our two regions.

Right away, you know that there was some kind of war between the two groups, which led to the establishment of a de-militarized zone. The fact that they still have a Neutral Zone between them makes you think that the Romulans are potentially hostile, which makes you wonder if this one is going to attack the Enterprise, etc.

It's still an "as you know, Bob"...

[FennelGiraffe]

Another way is to imagine your story as a screenplay. Instead of you, the omnipotent author, explaining the backstory, how can you work it into the dialogue instead? Again, Star Trek was a master of this. I can't remember the name of it (I'm sure my fellow Trekkies will supply it ;)), but I remember the old episode where the Romulans were introduced. Since they were a totally new alien, the writers had to fill in the backstory with just a few lines of dialogue. They succeeded nicely.

Kirk: Who are they?

Spock: The Romulans, Captain.

Kirk: The Romulans! What are they doing in Federation space? We haven't had contact with them in fifty years!

Spock: Indeed, the Federation lost contact with the Romulans after Treaty X established the Neutral Zone between our two regions.

If one char really doesn't know something, you can get away with a certain amount of another char explaining it, which some of Spock's typical lines are. This example, however, is pure As You Know, Bob dialog, sometimes shorted to AYKB. Not recommended.

[Lolly]

Just trying to think of a way to make things easier. I was thinking of Tolkien. I love his stories, but wading through all...that...backstory...can drag you down.

[preyer]

'Infodump has had a longstanding definition in Fantasy & SF circles. It has always meant background info presented as a large, indigestible lump of exposition. (With some disagreement as to whether As You Know, Bob dialog is a subtype of infodumping, or a separate category.) The term's emphasis is on the method of presentation. The same information, mentioned delicately in small snippets throughout the story, is not an infodump.'

indeed, i consider AYKB infodumping. it serves no other reason other than to get the reader up to speed, which is exactly the purpose of infodumping. anyone care to debate that, good luck, as i just don't see the major difference.

when i was critiquing in the SYW sf/fantasy forum, i, among others, would often pick out true infodumps and show how they could be written out or at least hidden better. one of the ways is simply pick the infodump apart and disperse it into smaller chunks. 'sprinkling,' if you will. ne'ertheless, a bit from an infodump is still an infodump, and from that excerpt you can often water the bit down and hide it a little better. it is what it is, imo, regardless of length.

as i mentioned, you'll find a lot of infodumping in sf/fantasy due to world-building. i aver that a lot of it is unneccesary if it's not ego-tripping if it's not poor writing.

'but, Preyer, tolkien's background info seemed to last forever!'

i'll have to take your word on that, i don't remember. assuming this is true, that's certainly proof that over half a century ago you could redefine the genre for a modern audience. today, your tolkien-esqe world needs no significant introduction. basically, i rail against any 'traditional' that amounts to boring, uninspired writing. infodumping is a fact of writing life, but you can hide it certain ways or give up trying to hide it the best you can, in which case i'm not apt to read a writer unwilling to make the effort. after all, if you can't feign creativity in hiding the infodumps why should i think you're attempting creativity in any writing capacity at all?

maybe great storytellers should write scripts, great writers to short stories, and leave novels to great storytellers *and* great writers?

[AllisterGrim]

The best approach I've seen for dealing with the info dump is to make it the solution to an enigma. If you are skilled enough, you can starve a reader for information, even create interest and suspense by what you leave out.

Look at English country house mysteries. The endings of many of the classics are essentially long info dumps, yet no one minds because we are so hungry for the solution. Anyone seen Lost? By the end of the first season, you are BEGGING for someone to tell you backstory. The Matrix has great worldbuilding, but they tease you with what you don't know through half the movie before the grand reveal.

Of course this isn't the easiest thing to pull off. The good news is that just trying can often help a story. When you are trying to make a piece of info mysterious, you find that yourself pulling all those long explanations out and trying to save them for the end. Sometimes you'll find that you can figure it out from context, so you can do away with the dump altogether. At the very least it encourages you to be miserly about unessential details.

[Bufty]

Just popping the information into an anecdote or dialogue isn't always enough in my view. That, in many instances, makes it an infodump or 'as you know' dialogue.

Firstly, as preyer and others have said, the information has to be essential information, without which the reader would falter.

Secondly, in my humble opinion it can be got across far more effectively if one character needs to obtain that information for him to progress, and has to weasel or tease it out of another character who for his own reasons is reluctant to divulge it.

Just my two-penneth.

[deathwizard]

Nothing in writing is inherently evil. It's all in the execution.

For instance, back in the days when the Tampa Bay Bucs were terrible, coach John McKay was asked how he felt about the execution of his offense, and he said, "I'm in favor of it."

Infodumps are kind of like that, I guess.

[gp101]

I've found that infodumps can be parcelled away in dialogue rather nicely, just not all at once. Like Bufty mentioned, you can easily risk going from a standard infodump to a dialogue infodump "as you know...". Neither is good. Moderation is key.

Introducing a new character who doesn't have the info but seeks it can get across a lot of BG. Or as Bufty mentioned, arrange it so that your current characters must need the info in your infodump, and as they discover it, the reader discovers it.

Or, if you need to keep the infodump in your prose, split it up and offer it in smaller doses throughout the story; just don't insert too much of it during the action scenes; that would slow the entire story to a halt.

Just keep in mind that the info needs to be necessary and that moderation will serve you kindly.

[blacbird]

One of the chief hazards faced by most writers, at least in rough draft stages, is the subconscious need to provide more "information" that the reader will need, or want. I know this happens to me, and I try to pay attention to it pretty closely during editing/rewriting. Unfettered, that writer's desire leads to info-dumps, IMO.

caw

[maestrowork]

I really like what Uncle Jim said: don't tell the readers anything until they're ready to know.

I like to keep the information close to my vest until it's necessary to reveal them. I like to create suspense. Just because I, the writer, know these things doesn't mean my readers need to know. Sometimes they don't have to know anything at all. Much like how an actor would do all these background stuff, motivation, research and such, and the audiences don't necessarily see all that but it helps the actor bring his character to life. Same here.

Now, when it's time to reveal pertinent information, there are many methods I use. Dialogue is a really good way to reveal information (but don't do info dumpy/as you know Bob dialogue). Mini-flashbacks are another good way to reveal information, perfect for those "down times" between action scenes, or during "silent" moments. Other ways to reveal info: letters, correspondences, diaries, etc..

Basically, keep the plot moving. And only reveal as much as you should, but no more than what the readers need to know at the time.

[IceCreamEmpress]

I think with exposition in dialogue, the answer is almost always to read it aloud. If it feels stilted when you read it aloud, it probably is stilted.

Spock can get away with more infodumping than most characters because his speech patterns are already stilted, and he's always lecturing people about this and that.

[Feathers]

I'm nearing the end of my WIP and I have yet to resolve some of the important plot points. I found myself falling into the infodump trap as sort of an easy way out in as few cases.

I want to keep the action moving (this is, after all, the thrilling conclusion) without rambling explanations and such.

I'm curious to know how some of you have handled this. What are some good alternatives if I start to smell infodump?

Thanks.

Make it into a scene with action/dialouge. I know some authors that used this ploy, thinking that just because they had a scene no one would notice the infodump, but I did - the whole thing was one of those Scooby-Doo endings: "But how did you steal the diamond?" "Oh, Mary gave me the key, and I just smuggled it into my pocket - I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for you kids and your dog."
What I'm trying to say is, you want to highlight the important points, involve them, and ditch the rest.

I write a lot of sci-fi. A problem I often run across is trying to make your very technical story reader-friendly, but explain things so they know what is going on. I'm working on a story right now where symbionic artifical intelligence has attached itself to a teenage boy, covering him in a metal/organic alloy suit, and he's trying to get rid of it. As the boy figured out how his suit worked, I explained bits and pieces of the technical stuff in little bites. That's what works for me.

One important thing: never have your bad guys go babbling about everything they did and why. That happens all the time...see my Scooby-Doo example above.

-Feathers

[maestrowork]

.

One important thing: never have your bad guys go babbling about everything they did and why. That happens all the time...see my Scooby-Doo example above.

-Feathers

That's called monologuing. Very popular in thrillers and action movies. Brad Bird made fun of that in The Incredibles.

[David I]

Nothing in writing is inherently evil. It's all in the execution.

Right on!

It's only an "infodump" if it is poorly executed and the reader finds it boring. Exposition is not inherently a bad thing. Sometimes telling is better than showing.

Some writers believe that artistic quality has something to do with writing-class cliches. If you write great exposition, readers won't perceive it as an infodump.

We've been talking about exposition over on my blog, and I have a trio of posts on the First Annual Exposition Exposition (http://davidisaak.blogspot.com/2007/12/psychic-distance-etc-part-vi-first.html). This lays down some expository passages from a variety of writers from across the literary spectrum (Richard Adams, Martin Amis, Michael Crichton, William Faulkner, Stephen King, Ian McEwan, Vladimir Nabokov, Francine Prose, and some lesser-known writers).

If you need to impart a bunch of information, do it so well that the reader doesn't notice. Or, better yet, do it so well the reader thinks it is one of the best parts of the book.

[AFGNCAAP]

If you must infodump, make it a naturally occurring one within dialogue--in real life, people sometimes have to explain things to less knowledgeable people in length...stay within reason, though. My rule of thumb is to avoid anything if it seems unnatural.