In Defense of Exposition

Writing fiction is an entirely different animal from non-fiction. Sure, the basics are the same, but I've found that fiction requires a different kind of diligence and deliberateness. Every word matters; simply telling the story, like non-fiction demands above all else, is rarely the most pivotal aspect of a piece in this alternate writing universe.

In modern fiction workshops, the adage "show, don't tell" has become law to the point that even its banality doesn't feel fresh anymore. Now, there's a lot of truth to such a statement, and it's something young writers need to pay close attention to - it helps keep characters from devolving into caricatures, and gives inexperienced narrative voices training wheels as they develop. But this reaction against exposition has gone too far, I believe, and likely a result of the proliferation of creative writing in academia. (This is not intended as a slam against the MFA culture, and now is as good a time as any to state that I'm probably/hopefully/maybe switching over to a MFA program next year. Sorry Interwebz, you're always the last to know!)

I recently received a critique of a short story of mine, from an experienced writer working as a reader for a literary magazine. While I was disappointed the story hadn't been accepted for publication (rejection happens a lot in this world, one gets used to it), I welcomed the critique as a way to improve my writing in general and the short story in question. I'm new to professional fiction, after all, and recognize its vast differences in construct from non-fiction, essays, and op-eds. And, by and large, the reader's advice was sharp and insightful. One TrackChange, though, bothered me, and bothered me because it's just really, really, unequivocally, and grossly incorrect: "Story is going to win over exposition each time."

With respect, the universality of this statement displays a formulaic and rather bland approach to writing. I enjoy Raymond Carver as much as the next person, but for Christ's sake, other styles exist. There are technical aspects to the craft for sure, but it's not a science - I doubt there's ever a time in literature that something is going to win out over something else each time. Exposition, as a technique, only competes against other literary techniques, not against the story itself. Further, some of the greatest writers in the history of language have relied on the literary tool of exposition for pages on end - Dickens and Hemingway come immediately to mind - and their works seem to have held up pretty well.

Exposition allows a writer to tell the story they want to tell, explaining facts, context, and background info and doling out descriptions and imagery to save space that otherwise might take too long "to show." We control those pages, after all, and the pace and themes and structure are our own. While I'm as wary and bored by pages upon pages of pop philosophizing as the next reader, if something is good writing, I'll keep reading, no matter what form it comes in - dialogue, argumentation, description, narration, stream of consciousness rambles ... and yes, even exposition. To completely avoid a literary technique because it's become en vogue to describe it as "an information dump" is as limiting as it is rigid. A good story needs framework, otherwise it won't say anything - pretty words without purpose and direction are just pretty words, and hollow ones at that.

I took to Twitter a couple nights ago to check the temperature of exposition. And, frankly, to make sure I wasn't just feeling sorry for myself. Turns out, I'm not the only one who feels this way. Robin Black, author of the celebrated short story collection If I Loved You, I Would Tell You, tweeted back "I totally agree the 'show don't tell' thing got out of hand at some point. It's not that simple. Sometimes just tell it." And one of the Cummings brothers at the blog On Violence pointed out that this "rule" should be meant for novice writers, equating it to avoiding the passive voice. Spot-on analysis from both.

I'm certainly not arguing that the initial backlash against exposition, some decades ago, wasn't deserved or understandable. But in any art form, techniques will ebb and flow. Just as Shakespeare didn't kill the sonnet, exposition didn't die with the High modernists. And taking a cue from elementary school, I choose to exist in a writing world where Show and Tell are important to a good fiction story. To paraphrase the advice of an early creative writing teacher of mine, "if everyone else is doing it one way, doing the exact opposite is probably a good idea." Viva storytelling! Viva contrarianism! And viva exposition!