Originally Posted by
Raye
While taste is subjective, and i'm not going to say you're wrong for liking older stuff, I mean, i still vastly prefer the newer style. I don't find books boring month to month, I love speculating about what will come next, and you can do a lot more of that with decompressed stories. Decompression can be used poorly, and if a writer can't keep your attention month to month, that's a sign they may not be using decompression well, but when done well, decompression actually increases my interest month to month a lot of the time. I've never had to have a writer explain to me what had just happened, I find them perfectly readable as is. Sure there are sometimes stories with a slow reveal where everything comes together at the end and you go 'oh, so that's why this and this happened the way they did' but i mean, that was clearly the intent from the start, to have the reader initially a bit confused and questioning things until the reveal. And there are some stories where the point is to pose questions rather than answer them, to make the reader think about something for themselves. But that's about the extent of it.
I really don't believe, except maybe in the case of stories intended for children as their primary audience, that writers should be playing to the lowest common denominator and assuming people will be too slow to get something without it being explained in exacting and redundant detail. If someone is too dense to get it, or lack the patience to see a story play out before getting up in arms about an early story beat, oh well.