Joining the dots

[John Dean]

As you will have become aware from my blogs on the subject over the years, an author’s use of back story carries with it many perils, namely the temptation to pack in far too much information.

Back story refers to the characters’ history and one of the most common mistakes I note when I’m called upon to offer comments on inexperienced authors’ manuscripts is that the author has packed in lots of it, particularly in the opening pages when they are setting the scene.

Why is that a peril? Because every reference to the past risks slowing down the momentum of a story and losing a reader’s attention, particularly if the back story is presented in an information-rich block.

It is much better if the back story is used sparingly and only when relevant. Why do I mention this? Because I am working on the new DCI Jack Harris and am developing a new character who, it turns out, shares similar life experiences with the detective.

That has meant that, suddenly, I have a character who is coming to life and a plot that has been given added intricacy, mystery and momentum with the back story  presented  in the form of plotlines rather than information dumps.

As the best-selling novelist Jamie Ford says: “Writing back story feels like storytelling, but it isn’t. It’s regurgitating facts, or dolling up aspects of world-building—basically plugging in what that author already knows, hoping it will entertain and enlighten the reader. Instead it has the opposite effect. Less is more. Back story is like creating a ‘connect-the-dots’ picture—you just need the dots. The reader will draw the lines.’