#WritersCoffeeClub Ch 9 Nbr 08 — When writing technical or scientific detail, how much is plausible versus imagined?
Everything in a story must come across as plausible, full stop. It doesn't matter whether it is imagined or factual. This is as true for writing technical or scientific detail as it is for writing about social interactions. Here's my secret sauce recipe:
If I don't or can't understand the details necessary for the story, I don't write it. I won't write a story about a convenience store clerk because I don't know what that is like, nor am I willing to commit the brain cells to learn. This is one of the reasons I write fantasy and not mainstream or historical stories.
If I understand in layman's terms, I rely on subject matter expert characters to relate what's necessary. For example, I wouldn't explain in a story how the combustion engine works any more than I would explain how the star drive works. I rely on my mechanic, who at the most technical says I replaced a part and here's the bill.
If I am making up the details—which can be how the magic works or the social details for a society that exists only in my head—I rely on consistency and limits to build plausibility.
If something minor occurs that I can't explain, I lampshade it—I hide the bare electric bulb with pretty fabric enough so that the characters in the story believe what happened is plausible. Generally, readers will accept this. See item 6.
If I end up researching something for the story, as I did to write a story about prizefighter, I present only the technical details I know and use items 2 and 4 otherwise. Yes, I learned how to punch a speed bag and train as a fighter, but I'm not one. Since the story involved "mixed magical martial arts," I made s**t up, also, which is item 3.
Most importantly, I work to not stretch the reader's credulity and base everything I can in the common reality the reader shares with me. This promotes plausibility.
