I've read a lot of threads about info-dumping and how to avoid it, but I'm in a situation where my novel needs one / some.
Although the novel is a thriller, it's based on potentially real science. Whilst I'll happily read technical stuff, I'm guessing the average reader won't really care that much how the science works. How much technical info does the reader need? I want the avoid the deus ex machina feeling of glossing over the science.
I've got plenty of natural points where I can inject little bits of the science and this is working well, but there is one section where a potentially lethal flaw in the tech is identified. I have a scene where the scientist realises the flaw exists and needs to tell her client. This point would be ideal to reveal the cause of the problem, and the client's lack of prior knowledge of the technology would match the average readers knowledge of the subject. It's all needed in the plot but I'm worried about info dumping.
The obvious solution (which annoys me in films) would be a monologue from the scientist, telling the client about the problem. I think there must be a more elegant way to get the info from the scientist to the client. This point is also where she realises that she might be on the wrong side, and sows a few more seeds for her potential redemption later in the tale.
I did consider breaking the revelation into a couple of smaller scenes, and spreading the info out. For example, the scientist learns of the problem from a colleague, she has a bit of internal angst about the ethics. Finally she tells the client. But I then hit the problem of why would the scientists be filling each other in with background info about the device? Why would she tell herself some of the science of the flaw, when she was considering her next step... For me this kind of story telling strains at the forth wall, if that makes any sense.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to handle the need to include facts or explanations of how stuff works, without info-dumping or shoe horning in extras, whose sole purpose is to introduce a convenient plot device?
Although the novel is a thriller, it's based on potentially real science. Whilst I'll happily read technical stuff, I'm guessing the average reader won't really care that much how the science works. How much technical info does the reader need? I want the avoid the deus ex machina feeling of glossing over the science.
I've got plenty of natural points where I can inject little bits of the science and this is working well, but there is one section where a potentially lethal flaw in the tech is identified. I have a scene where the scientist realises the flaw exists and needs to tell her client. This point would be ideal to reveal the cause of the problem, and the client's lack of prior knowledge of the technology would match the average readers knowledge of the subject. It's all needed in the plot but I'm worried about info dumping.
The obvious solution (which annoys me in films) would be a monologue from the scientist, telling the client about the problem. I think there must be a more elegant way to get the info from the scientist to the client. This point is also where she realises that she might be on the wrong side, and sows a few more seeds for her potential redemption later in the tale.
I did consider breaking the revelation into a couple of smaller scenes, and spreading the info out. For example, the scientist learns of the problem from a colleague, she has a bit of internal angst about the ethics. Finally she tells the client. But I then hit the problem of why would the scientists be filling each other in with background info about the device? Why would she tell herself some of the science of the flaw, when she was considering her next step... For me this kind of story telling strains at the forth wall, if that makes any sense.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to handle the need to include facts or explanations of how stuff works, without info-dumping or shoe horning in extras, whose sole purpose is to introduce a convenient plot device?
