However, the reader and the MC are not aware of this for a large portion of the story---in fact, it's not important at all to the real story I'm trying to explore, in which the MC defends the creature/human from a mob of people bent on destruction. The climax occurs when the MC realizes that, despite his young age, he has a moral obligation to protect a defenseless creature, even if that creature is being attacked by a mob composed of his own family.
In this way, the story is a story about a character's change and growth.
What obligation do I have to explore the methods whereby the dragon's tranformation occurs? Do I have to construct a scene in which the MC confronts the witch who cast the spell?
I guess my real question is this: if an event is implied, what is my obligation to the reader to resolve the conflict that event implies?
Thanks. Hopefully this makes sense.
-----------
Wellington
What then is the purpose of having the human change into a dragon in the first place? Why couldn't it just be a dragon the MC defends? Can you tell me what role the transformation itself plays? That would make it easier to consider your question.
-----------
Wellington
As to the question about plot, I think if your main point is the MC's defense of a helpless creature, and the climax of the story is his choice to save the dragon, you probably don't want to bog the story down by drawing out the conclusion with a witch confrontation. Perhaps you could sum up events in a sentence or two.
You don't want to leave it inconclusive, so you'll probably have to write _something_ about the witch. But I think that you can keep it brief.
That's my thought on the matter, anyway. But it also depends on the style of your writing. Good luck with it!
If your point was that he fell in love with her, then found out that she was "really" a dragon in disguise and this is actually additional motivation for him to kill her, you should say that more clearly.
Certainly I think you must resolve this, to avoid readers feeling disappointed.
from your description, I'm way more interested in the guy who turns into a dragon than I am in the part about defending some defenseless loser from a mob or whatever.
Maybe it's just how you described it here.
I think the answer to the question you asked is: you are not obligated to explore and explain areas that are not relevant to your plot. BUT what you need to realize is that by raising issues, you raise the reader's interest in those issues, and not exploring them makes us cranky and then we start accusing you of withholding information and then you start accusing us of demanding that you explain everything in the first 13 and it all just goes in endless circles from there, like a tire rolling downhill until it falls into a swamp and drowns in quicksand. And maybe you could rescue it but there are alligators. And mosquitos. I think there's a pirate ship that sank about 300 yards that way. Wonder what's in the hull? Oh boy.
(Bet you'd like to read more about the swamp and the quicksand, wouldn't you? Too bad. It's actually irrelevant. Sorry I raised the issue.)
The best way to avoid charges of withholding information is to not raise the issue in the first place. If the transformation isn't relevant to your story - don't put it in there. If it is relevant, you have to do it justice, and it has to pull its weight.
Hope that makes sense and is of some use.
Now to implement them. Groan.
-----------
Wellington