Explanation in Quotes
I have already talked about the problems caused by extensive blocks of explanation or exposition. Although a reader needs to know stuff for the plot or memoir to proceed, blocks of explanation can also slow down the action and often is more tell than show.
Some writers believe that they are getting around this problem by having one or more of the characters convey what they want to get across. Here is an example.
The doctor said, “I need to refer you to an ophthalmologist. Not an optometrist. An ophthalmologist is a physician specializing in injuries and diseases affecting the eye. He can do surgery, too. Not that you will necessarily need that but I want to check your field of vision. They have a test where you click on a clicker when you see a bright light. It determines that you have good peripheral vision. It only takes a few minutes.
“Now, I don’t want you to worry. It’s probably nothing but better safe than sorry.”
Actually, explanation in quotes often goes on for much longer but I’m trying to save your time and eyes.
What’s wrong with explanation in quotes (EIQ)?
EIQ differs from our old friend As-You-Know, Bob. If you remember, As-You-Know dialog communicates information to the reader by reminding a character (Bob, in this case) of it even though Bob already knows. But EIQ is communicating information which is news to the speaker’s audience. So, in that way, it could be seen as a step up or a lesser sin. And the problem is not so much an individual incident of EIQ but a multitude of them in a novel or memoir.
Multiple EIQs slow forward action. It is as if we are all poised to start the race and have to stop to listen to a lecture on sportsmanship. Even if we need to know the information, it delays action that the reader/runner was anticipating.
How to do explanation so it doesn’t slow things down
Cut it down to the pertinent facts.
First, you need to decide if this piece of information is critical to your story (e.g. protagonist is going blind) or incidental (e.g. she has hit her eye so she later misses a clue which she would have seen out of the corner of her eye).
If it isn’t critical, you can probably get away with something like:
The doctor said, “I want to refer you to a specialist in eyes. To check your field of vision. Now, I don’t want you to worry. It’s probably nothing but better safe than sorry.”
Break up the explanation
If the information is critical, then give it the prominence it deserves and make it part of the story.
The doctor said, “I’d like to refer you to an ophthalmologist.”
I sat up straighter. “What’s that?”
“Eye specialist. I’d like him to check your peripheral vision.”
“My vision? What’s wrong with it?”
“It’s probably nothing but better safe than sorry.”
“But then why the referral?”
You get across the main information while also communicating your protagonist’s concern/tension. A bonus.
Finding a way to dramatize critical information makes it more likely your reader will take it in and contribute to the forward action rather than slowing it down.