Support for Indie Authors discussion
Archived Author Help
>
What is the right amount of information?
date
newest »
newest »
I'm working on a scifi as well. I didn't dump the whole thing in the first chapter because I thought the reader will be loaded. perhaps you can write few glimpses about the society you built and I think it's enough.
I'm not sure if my way is correct because I'm a newbie as well. good luck :)
Just bear in mind, it's one review, one person's opinion. Not a statement of dogmatic fact. Some people want all the details, some don't. Is it the only review you have so far?
Mod
Try explaining the concepts in a subtle way.Giving the reader an idea of whatever it is but not giving away too much.Otherwise just keep rolling,maybe other people will like the way you write.
I have nothing to add except to listen to Joe and J. Daniel. Book reviews are opinions. They reflect the reader's likes and dislikes only. Your best bet would be to move on and continue to write in a way that you wish to write. You can't please everyone, so why worry?
I've had reviews where readers have complained about me being too descriptive and others saying I don't describe enough. (This for the same book.) It all boils down to personal preference, you will never be able to please everybody so as long as you are happy with your story I say you shouldn't worry too much what people think. I know it's easier said than done though :)
Just enough is plentyfire my imagination; don't drown it
Alp
The right amount of information is like the right amount of flour in a cake: you need to add only enough to make it work.Depends on the book, the author ... and the reader.
I saw a reviewer give a 1-star rating after only reading 40 pages of a really fascinating book because the author didn't tell us more than the characters knew, and only gave us detailed information when the characters were thinking about it, or discussing it with others.
I.e., the reader couldn't be bothered to let the story and information unfold as the author intended. They demanded all the info right now, despite the fact that the author had chosen a very narrow narrative POV for a reason.
So temper how much you read into bad reviews (and good ones for that matter). No book works for every reader. But if you start seeing half or more of your reviews complaining about it, then you can start wondering if you need to adjust.
Agree w/no info dumps; don't even bother w/a prologue. A blurb should be good enough. In this way the mystery and newness of your universe can be revealed slowly through the actions, thoughts and observations of your characters.
Generally speaking info dumps are a big no no. Most people find them boring and lose interest. Better to involve the reader with the character's emotions, problems etc and work the necessary setting/background info in gradually as the story unfolds, so I would say don't worry about this review.
I read that review, and your book wasn't what that person was looking for. The review has no relevance beyond that person's personal opinion. In my view, the right amount of info is the amount you, as the author, want to include. There are no rules, there is only what you want to write. For example, I love "info dumps" and we include them lavishly. We always have a prologue and (so far) an epilogue. We bring up things that won't be relevant for two or even three books in the future. We leave loose ends and we sometimes let a book end without a real conclusion.
Some people really dislike this. Some people love it. That's fine. We are writing for the us [first] and the latter group [second].
Our feeling about reviews is this: positive reviews are a nice -- we like to know we made someone happy, that's why we write: to make someone happy (not everyone, not even most people). Negative reviews are "never mind", although they can be funny. But in terms of feedback on your writing, your story, or your stylistic choices, both positive and negative reviews are meaningless.
It was [as recall] Dwayne who said it best in another thread here: reviews are not for the author. They are for other readers, to indicate a purely subjective opinion that might be of use to people whose tastes align with the reviewer's. That's all. They have no bearing on what you should do or what decisions you should make.
Mod
Mod
I have said that, yes. I'm pretty sure others here have, too. I'll add, too, that sometimes a negative review might attract readers. The review you, Rachael, mentioned might actually work to attract readers who are looking for more story and less background and history.
I read a quote recently that went like this: 'Nobody ever built a statue to a critic.' If 3/4 of the people like the way you did it, don't worry about it. Make what you do as professional as possible, and learn to get better every day, but if the criticism is not valid, don't let them get inside your head.
Morris wrote: "I read a quote recently that went like this: 'Nobody ever built a statue to a critic.' If 3/4 of the people like the way you did it, don't worry about it. Make what you do as professional as possib..."Boom! Like that. That's the response! Well said.
Personally I went through the five stages of grief with my first dog review. Now I agree with the above. It's much easier.
Once upon a time, an extensive description of the setting was necessary to bring readers into the world of your book. No so anymore, with travel being so much easier and so many resources to help us see the world right from home (TV and Internet). Those days of long-winded descriptions are long over, and readers can/should be able to visualize much better now. Don't let one bad review get you down. You can't make them all happy - and most likely, it could have been a review from somebody either new or not extremely familiar with how current scifi is written.
Perhaps this is me being a comparative newbie to sci fi, but I always thought providing lots of information about the world (especially in the first few chapters) was bad writing. The sci fi I'm most familiar with - Orwell, Atwood and Huxley - either reveal the background gradually or don't mention it at all, expecting you to keep up.
I'd understand if the world being described was wholly alien, with cat people and strange languages, but my culture differs only in two main respects - they're far more technologically advanced and they're a religious matriarchy.
What do people think? Do they have to know how a society was shaped or do they just get on with the story?