Revealing the Hidden/Lifting the Cloak

[bcomet]

Lately, I have been thinking about the dilemma of writers who hesitate to take the reader all the way in.

I know I have wrestled with this (I think in a good way that caused my writing to grow) in the past. In my own experience, I had to let go of the fear that revealing the mysterious would make it commonplace. I was afraid it would destroy the magic.

To my delight, it only magnified the magic.

How I came to my own conclusion on this was to imagine I was watching a movie and then never got to see the monster or the alien or the magical realm. I was there for that! I want to see it. I feel cheated if it's withheld from me.

Then, I realized, the weakest point in several of my critique group writing partners was the same thing. They didn't show us the whole nitty gritty. They kept it behind the cloak. In one example, a whole novel about vampires was written without ever showing us a vampire. Hey, bring on the vampire already. Bring it on early and give it colour and light it up.

Sometimes, it seems that it is fear that it will dissolve, that it won't hold up in the light that keeps writers from revealing a thing. Other times, the writer may be withholding and may not even realize that they are.

But it seems part of the writing process to trust the hidden, to show it, to trust it with the reader, to open the curtain.

What are your processes with this, both as writers and readers? How much do you reveal or not and why?

[HillaryJ]

When I was younger, I would purposefully withhold things, thinking it was more mysterious. Or even, you know, surreal or something. Instead, it was pretentious on my part and frustrating to the reader.

Recently, I was accused of leading the reader on with "false mystery"...having my characters worry about/chase something that the reader never sees. In my mind, the story was about the chase rather than the result, but the reader (in this case an editor who angrily rejected my ss) felt cheated. I hadn't meant to cheat, but as writers we have to look at the story through the eyes of someone who hasn't lived with it inside their head, and doesn't know what's behind that smoking, billowing curtain. Which is why God invented BETA readers. The movie parallel is a good way to visualize what you are doing to your intended audience.

Do you pay off their diligent interest or leave them hanging? When you pay $1900.50 to see a movie, how do you want to feel afterwards? Surprised, shocked, horrified, delighted? Yes. Frustrated? No.

It is very difficult to write credible surprise well, which may be why some writers try to let the mystery be. But that's not an excuse for refusing to show at least a portion of the mystery's solution. Also, pretty much every time an inexperienced author thinks of itself as clever, it isn't. I literally cringe when I read over some of my old stories.

[bcomet]

Which is why God invented BETA readers.

Too funny!!!

Do you pay off their diligent interest or leave them hanging? When you pay $1900.50 to see a movie, how do you want to feel afterwards? Surprised, shocked, horrified, delighted? Yes. Frustrated? No.

Wow, if I paid $1900.50 to see a movie, I would want to interact with its world for a month or two.

I agree completely with your comments. It's like a light goes on in the writing process––hopefully!––when we say,: "No really! Come on in to this place!" to the reader.

[HillaryJ]

It's a specific part of the show/don't tell maxim, I think. Don't have your characters talk about the story...show us the story.

I may have been a place or two off with my decimal point there. :)