The Pub Discussion Board

First off, the best way to establish a character's... uh.... character...    ... is to show their reactions to things.  When it is necessary to relate back-story to the reader, do so at a point where it is immediately relevant.  Long narrations about a character's past and their personality makeup are, as you said, extremely dull.  However, if, at a point where a character reacts to something, you can insert a few sentences about why they're reacting that way (without, of course, destroying the flow of the story), then that will be better.

Also, if lots of back-story is truly vital to the story, flashbacks work better than narrative.  Anything that keeps action happening, as opposed to what is really a complete break from the story while you, the author, impart information.

Also, do keep in mind that not all of the information that is vital to you as an author, is vital to the reader.  Only include the characterization information that is necessary for the enjoyment of the story.  As an author, you have to have a deep understanding of your characters, in order for you to get them to act consistently.  The reader doesn't need quite this depth of knowledge.

As an example:  In The Woodward Academy, Year 1, in the very first scene, which is not straight narrative, we learn that our main character, David, is just graduating high school, is probably not a virgin, but is certainly not a "stud", is intellectual enough to go to college and be considered a geek, and gullible enough to fall for a practical joke.  All of that, in less than 400 words, and no real "narration" in sight.

The basic rule for this is, "Show, Don't Tell."  In other words, demonstrate their character, don't just tell us about it.  Only tell us about it if it's just not possible to show us in a reasonable fashion.

Anyway, that's my 80¢.  (Inflation.)
Eric Storm

Jefferson, your suggestion ignores something that Kouskul said in his original post:

Kouskul wrote:

There seems to be a recurring problem that I personally find will be the death of any interest in my story (myself included) unless I tackle it quickly, it is in the form of "prattling".

(emphasis added.)

He won't be able to finish the book if he loses interest in writing it, now will he?  Not to mention that Kouskul, like most internet authors, is posting serially, rather than upon completion of the novel.  He really cannot afford to do what you're suggesting, because he will have lost all his readers long before he gets to the end of the story.

Not to mention, what you're suggesting doesn't really ever teach him to think about what he's writing.  Yes, go back and edit when you're finished, definitely... to find what you DIDN'T catch while you were writing it.  But to just blithely write down anything and everything while you're in the writing process...  You've just created twice as much work for yourself.  Once when you wrote all that stuff you didn't need (and let's face it, the writing itself is not a simple task), and again when you have to figure out how to take it all back out.  Most writers will be reticent to remove paragraphs and (perhaps) pages they worked so hard to create...  And quite frankly, the number of really good editors on the internet that I would personally trust to give the kind of feedback you're suggesting is virtually non-existent.

Just getting to the end of the writing... really shouldn't be your goal.  But, again, that's just my opinion.

Eric Storm