Invisible Ink: Backfilling · 9:34pm Oct 1st, 2015
Invisible Ink
Sentence Sophistication: Backfilling
Following on from yesterday, I made a connection so something I was warned about a long time ago: backfilling.
Remember when I said that ABC is easier to process than ACB? Backfilling is why. If I include a chair in some prose and don’t describe it, the reader is left to imagine what that chair looks like. If I want the reader to imagine a particular chair – say, because the details are helping me set the tone for the passage – then the optimum is to use the description as the noun, just as I mentioned yesterday. If I wait to describe the chair, I run the risk of my reader having to stop, mentally scrub that previous image, and re-create a new one, which interrupts their experience. That’s not very invisible.
But if I start a sentence with ‘The high-backed, rectangular, solid oak chair with red velvet covering and lion’s-paw feet’, then it’s pretty clear that the sentence is going to be a flop. That’s just too dense to read easily and be digested. That could only work if the prose was actively stopping to describe the chair – which is fine, so long as that’s not simultaneously interrupting the flow of the paragraph or scene. What can do instead is consider which details best set the scene quickly, and which details will be least intrusive to add later. Adding a few brass adornments in three paragraphs time isn’t likely to upset anyone, but mentioning the glittering, diamond-encrusted armrests after your reader has been imaging something plain wood will add unnecessary turbulence to their ride.
Like so many facets of writing, there aren’t any rules for this. Consider carefully where your details are placed, and don’t wait too long when it’s importantly. Still, I started on descriptions because they’re the most obvious way to look at it, but there are other ways that we might consider the issues with backfilling information.
Dialogue, for one.
The general consensus is that an attribution tag, if one is necessary, ought to come as early in dialogue as it can be reasonably inserted. At the end of the first sentence is the first obvious place, but the pause between a subordinate clause and the main clause will do just as well. After a single introductory word is perfectly fine, too. The longer you leave your reader in the dark, the more jarring the inevitable back-filling might be:
Another issue is timing actions with dialogue:
“What’s that?” Henry said, looking around the room.
Here, I’m giving you very little information regarding what ‘that’ is, yet, I think you’ll find it an easy thing to imagine the action on some rudimentary level. He’s looking around the room, so his eyes aren’t locked on something, which means it’s probably a sound and he’s searching for the source. Easy stuff.
“What’s this?” Henry said, picking up a small piece of polished, L-shaped metal.
Now, like yesterday, there’s nothing inherently wrong with that sentence. Yet, the term ‘this’ is a lot more personal than ‘that’. It implies the speaker's attention is taken, and so the backfilling is slightly more noticeable because the reader will be drawn more intensely to ponder what ‘this’ is.
Henry flipped over a small, L-shaped piece of polished metal. “What’s this?”
Note that the focus is already on Henry, there, so the attribution can be dispensed with, and the focus of Henry’s attention is already clear, so the snippet of dialogue has more elbow room to conjure an accurate mental image – no backfilling necessary.
Overall, it’s the same concept applied to a different situation.
An example that is more abstract in nature, though no less worthy of attention, is which order to present a proper noun and a pronoun in within a sentence or paragraph. A common misconception is that the proper noun should come first, otherwise you’d be writing the pronoun before its antecedent.
Flipping Henry off, Crystal pocketed his ten dollar bill.
Does this look right? Say it to yourself aloud. Does it sound right?
I don’t think so. Let’s try again:
Flipping him off, Crystal pocketed Henry’s ten dollar bill.
Though we might need a little context outside this sentence for it to make sense, there are a couple of things that make this the preferable order, to my eye (and ear). Firstly, there is a lot to be said for the proper noun being in the main clause, rather than the subordinate clause. There’s some chance that I’m alone in this, but I always find this to be the first way I order a sentence, before I consider any other variations. Secondly, the participle phrase here is weak and lacks focus. That’s a good thing; it matches the tone with which it is presented. To me, putting the proper noun in the unfocused part of the sentence creates a tonal dissonance that it completely unnecessary. So it’s backfilling, but the low-key passivity of the opening clause mixed with the very short delay between anaphor and antecedent makes it easy reading.
So backfilling can cause glitches in how your prose reads, but it is often a necessary component to a smoothly-flowing narrative. The point, as always, is to consider the possible variations and decide which one works best and why.
Nobody said this stuff was easy.
-Scott 'Inquisitor' Mence
In other news, there was a wee bit of drama today when The Descendent posted that he was withdrawing from the RCL's 2nd Anniversary voting pool, citing his self-advertisement on his own blog (at my suggestion, I should add) and extraordinary follower count as being 'unfair'.
Well, for public record, I have prepared the following formal response:
You ain't won yet, bitch!
Team Juggy has three days left to bring the pain!
As of now, The New Crop is only three votes off the lead.
Team Juggy needs YOU to vote for victory!
Other stories may also exist.
(Love ya, T.D.!)
We are scrappy!
We are determined!
We will never give up!
We are... TEAM XJUGGERNAUGHTX!
We will now stop speaking in the third person!
3435034
We will do no such thing!
3435046 I think you're allowed, being from a royalty-accepting culture and all. Here in the US, we stay in the puritanical first person while we allow corporations to rule us.
These continue to be good. If I seemed surprised last time, it's just that no one's really gone in-depth into small writing details like this before. I really shouldn't be surprised at your ability to be articulate about such things, after all. :V
3435334 Welcome to my brain. Now perhaps you will appreciate why core writing skill is so essential to me really enjoying an otherwise mediocre story. I can forgive an awful lot if there's something to stimulate me emotionally (anyone remember my review of A Skitch in Time?), but if the plot isn't above average, the writing sure as hell has to be.
Not sure how frequently I'll be able to do these, but if I can do at least three per week, that'll keep me happy while I do some larger stuff in the background. If all goes according to plan, Chris might get a bit of a surprise :P
Finally the knowledge to analyse why some of my sentences sound like diary entries from a three-year-old. I'm loving this series so far.
These post are really great, by the way. I'm enjoying them a lot.