Also known as backstory dump
Story information the audience needs -- who people are, what happened before, how the world works. Strong drafts dramatize it; weak drafts dump it in speeches or captions.
Exposition is not the enemy; unmotivated exposition is. Audiences need facts to care about stakes. The craft question is whether a character has a reason to say or show the fact now -- conflict, seduction, warning -- or whether you paused the scene to brief the reader like a tour guide at the museum door.
Prefer dramatized reveals: an object found, a lie that slips, a rule enforced in public. Voice-over and speech can carry exposition when the voice has attitude and the facts arrive under pressure. Flat "as you know" dialogues and prologue walls of text are the patterns readers and rooms flag first in coverage.
Audit early pages for throat-clearing history. If Act One explains the world for six pages before anyone wants something hard, cut or delay. Seed only what the next scene needs, then let curiosity pull the rest. Pair this discipline with show-don't-tell so information arrives as behavior, not as a lecture taped to the plot.
No. Stories need information. Bad exposition arrives without pressure or motive -- a pause to brief the audience instead of a reveal earned by conflict.
Look for "as you know" energy, long speeches that stop tactics, or prologues that explain the world before anyone wants something urgent.
Yes when the voice has point of view and the facts arrive under tension. Neutral narration that only labels the plot usually feels like a dump.
Only what the next scenes need to be clear and urgent. Delay history that does not change what the protagonist must do now.
