posted
In the last couple of stories I have read, the writers made the claim that they intended for the reader to have no idea what is going on in their stories to create the "what the @#$@#$! is going on" effect.
Suspense comes from a story, that has created a foundation of trust in its reader by giving solid details about the character and setting, posing an element that the reader does not understand, but will hopefully be answered by the story's end. However, what I am seeing lately is that many writers are starting out with suspense before establishing a foundation and therefore entering into the realm of confusion.
A center of trust can come from the very first sentence of the story that simply tells the reader what is going on. Then in the second sentence, go ahead and add a suspense-filled detail. You better be the best-damn writer in the world to do this, but it is possible. I can't even give an example of this because I feel that suspense and creating questions in the mind of my reader should be saved for at least, the very least, the second paragraph. And only one element, not a thousand question marathon like I have seen:
"Who is this Billy guy the MC just mentioned?" "What is JKadfADFeardf?" "I thought the story was in space, but now it is talking about being underwater?" "Is this story in past or present tense?" "I thought I was in TIffany's mind, but now I looking through the eyes of fly on the wall." "Why is she swimming in the Mariannas Trench?" "How is she swimming in the Mariannas Trench?" "Will Michael ever get that liver transplant?" "Is Billy a JKadfADFeardf?" "Why am I still reading this?"
This is an example of creating confusion, not suspense and a desire to read more. Best advice: Confusion comes from adding smaller details and lacking important details, suspense comes lacking smaller details and adding important details.
P.S. Billy is a JKadfADFeardfm, Tiffany is swimming there to go on a date with Billy because she is a female JKadfADFeardf, and sadly, Michael does not get the liver transplant.
I completely agree with you here. I've seen the same thing over and over. I'd even add that sometimes you can create an even greater sense of mystery precisely by giving details. Maybe you've created an alien race. Wouldn't it be more interesting to tell what their culture is like to give the reader a feeling of otherness than to keep information about them hidden from the reader to try and create suspense? Sometimes the more you tell the more things the reader wants to know. That can be a cause of true suspense.
posted
Are you sure I didn't write that rant? I'm pretty sure I have before.
I'll go one step further: suspense is caused by knowing EACTLY what is going on and fearing for the consequences. (You may know what IS happening, you don't know what WILL happen...and the possibilities should be frightening.)
When I just don't know what is happening, I stop reading.
posted
OSC says suspense is knowing 98% of what's relevant and wondering about the 2%. It's not always (as I'd thought) knowing everything that's happened so far from MC's perspective but not knowing what's going to happen next. He suggests being very clear even about what might happen -- usually.
Posts: 2830 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you did post this before (although I do not think I read or meant to copy it), Christine, but the rant needs to be reiterated for the sake of this problem coming back. I just felt that too many people are playing off a poorly written story as a story that inspires intrigue in the reader by giving him little to no good information to begin with.
Posts: 162 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're right, Mystic. The thing about these rants is that those of us who've been around for a while are familiar with the pitfalls, but the board constantly plays host to newbies..(who are welcome and do bring fresh perspectives )
OSC has changed his stance on suspense, if he's going with 98%, although I can see why he says so. It leaves a little wiggle room for artistic license and is not so unforgiving. Still, usually when I see this problem it's some vague description of darkness and insanity that has no grounding in reality whasoever.
posted
I think it stems from an attempt to more or less manipulate the reader into feeling what the POV character is feeling instead of taking the time to clearly craft a story to show us a character's confusion. Characters can be confused, readers can't. If a character is confused, we need to know WHY he's confused.
As folks have pointed out, suspense is an entirely different kettle of fish. Suspense comes from knowing what's going on, but not necessarily where events are headed.
posted
I thought writers create suspense in the reader by showing the reader exactly what is going on that the character doesn't know about.
Posts: 603 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Corky -- that is one way to do it. For example, in the suspense sub-genre of mystery, we typically know who the killer is and even see scenes from his/her POV. In this case, knowing that, for example, the hero is about to walk into a trap can be quite suspenseful.
But even if all we know is what the main character knows we can still experience suspense. We don't have to know more than the hero does to feel suspenseful if he's about to fly off a cliff.
posted
Corky, that's more where dramatic irony takes over, except in the case of the mystery genre. With suspense, as a writer, you need to make the reader ask "How?" Ex. "How are they going to escape in time?" "How is he going to convict him of murder." "How will they defeat Lord Mastruferuss of Chaos and Destruction."
Posts: 162 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay. I would have called those questions part of the "tension" of the story.
As in romances, the "romantic tension" is often centered around the question: "When are these two idiots going to realize how crazy they are about each other?"
I would think that tension is resolved by answering those questions, and suspense is resolved when whatever the reader is expecting to happen (because of what the reader knows that the character doesn't know) either does happen or doesn't happen.
In the romance example above, the characters know how crazy they are about each other deep down inside, but are in denial about it for some reason, and the tension is over when they will quit being idiots and quit being in denial.
On the other hand, maybe they're the same thing, and I'm making to fine a distinction when there really isn't one.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
I'm pretty sure I have before. 
