I was talking to a friend of mine about how I was at an impasse in my book. I have been struggling with the idea of my main character being credited with creating a scientific discovery which has been a torn in the side of science for centuries. The character creates a way to move at near lightspeed. According to the science available now, the speeds she grants humans the ability to travel at is impossible.
The impasse comes at whether or not I pretend to explain it, using a mcguffin, or just leave it as a fact that she discovered this new thing and never even try to explain it. They are both easy to do, but the first creates new avenues that I can explore in the work, but also generates more work for me to explain, in universe, how that works.
The second feels like me admitting that I do not know how it could work. Though true, I am not sure how I feel about it. Maybe my huberus is taking hold, but there is also the feeling of leaving the rhamifications of such a discovery up to the imagination of the reader. I am not totally opposed to the idea, but I fear that it might create more questions than the reader would have otherwise.
Either way, my friends recommendation of just letting the story flow “like a pee” is not quite addressing the block that I am stuck behind. I agree that, a more conventional story, needs to have a little more of a natural progression behind it. In that case, his helpful insight may have helped a little more.
I am not saying that there is no appreciation in his statement. He at least tried his best to give me the advice that he thought I may have needed. Unfortunately, for me, it does not accelerate my process.
plain text. 