Narrative Scenes Explained

Let's begin by understanding that a narrative scene isn't as simple as adding a character to narrate the surroundings.  Great stories contain many elements, including scenes that are believably detailed and interesting characters the reader can connect with, that show emotions through action and dialogue.  Your practice should go deeper into developing a sense of presence, of presenting a situation intense and detailed enough to make the reader connect with the narrator.

The thing to avoid is too much narrative introspection (though there are times when this might be the exact method you need).  Typically, it takes a lot more craft to make narrative introspection interesting enough to draw in the reader.  Martha Alderson, the Plot Whisperer, wrote the following about balancing your work.

A story unfolds in scene, of course. And, scene is usually made up of dialogue and always action. But the dialogue I'm talking about is dialogue that advances the plot, NOT dialogue that is mere information dumping.

Introspection can give insight into the inner workings of the character, but is inherently flat and thus slows the plot. Therefore introspection should be used sparingly. This also goes for narrative. Telling--summary--puts distance between the reader and the story. Showing--in scene--draws the reader deeper into the story. Use "telling" sparingly.

It isn't enough to simply explain your point, good storytelling gets the reader involved.  Whether the mental stimulation of sci-fi, the otherworldliness of fantasy, the paranoia of mystery and suspense or the emotion laden nature of romance, you should know your audience and bring them into the situation far enough to feel the tension presented as a result of the conditions you've set forth.

Other sites of interest:

• Narrative summary vs scenes by Krista V at Mother. Write. (Repeat)
• A Narrative Scene that Worked by Robin Sloan at The Narrative Journal
• How to Write Narrative Essays using Scenes by David Miller at Matador Notebook

Are these stories science fiction?
Yes and no.  While what we are aiming for is more or less science fiction, it seems we would benefit from something a bit more focused.  It's up to the writer to portray the subject and scene as they wish, but the more hard science and realism we put into our narratives, the higher the believability.

Why not call it science fiction?
I love sci-fi in all of its various genres, but feel too much sci-fi ignores hard science and introduces concepts that aren't always attainable.  Especially in short frames where we aren't likely to make the advances necessary for certain marvels of human engineering and chemistry.  

As a result, it might help to think of them with terms like 'futurisms' or 'future artifacts' and certainly 'narrative scenes' and should focus on hard scientific speculation giving us a chance to work like archeologists to peel the future back a layer at a time.  

Staying with the archeology metaphor, some scenes are brilliant efforts that identify a new dig site.  Most of the scenes are brush strokes removing a few grains of sand at a time.  We might also consider the sculptorist who takes a block of stone and carves away everything that doesn't belong in the piece.  As a result, no effort is too small.  Everything can help flesh out what might happen in the future.  Even pieces you don't agree with are still valuable because they help you identify what you believe might not happen in the future.

Should every scene be limited to hard science?  How far should we go?
Every author should consider what is necessary to make the scene plausible by considering every characteristic of the story.  For example: Writing a scene that includes a spaceship with faster-than-light technology isn't far fetched, though many scientists consider it to be physically impossible.  How close in the future could we achieve FTL space flight?  Star Trek has it happen in 2063.  It is plausible we could make such a breakthrough by then, but that is far from the only breakthrough we need to survive in space.  Consider:

• Building ships: what technological advancements and how much money would be required?  Can the planet afford such a resource expensive endeavor?  Is it built by a government, group or corporation?
• Skeletal breakdown in zero gravity: some scientists don't believe we will ever be able to survive in space.  If this is true, we need artificial gravity.   When do we discover artificial gravity?
• Force fields: moving at speed through the debris in space is going to chew holes in your hull, what do we use for shields?

For something to be plausible, we have to consider the scenario from a holistic approach to science.  It takes more than an active imagination to make something believable, you also have to apply logic and consider all of the endeavor’s needs to sustain whatever you are presenting.