The Iceberg Theory and The Theory of Omission

Or, the post where I talk about Hemingway

Photo by NOAA on Unsplash

Show your readers, just the tip of the iceberg. That’s the core of the iceberg theory, which is also known as the theory of omission.

The theory implies that when you write a story there are going to be tons of details and bits and motivations and settings that you intentionally leave out. Some believe that by doing this you allow the reader to unravel the true complexity within your story.

Gasp!

It’s all about trust.

What Is the Iceberg Theory?

Ernest Hemingway was an author ages ago (last century) and he had this writing style that was considered very straightforward and minimal.

He believed that the story is beyond the page. That you can never put everything down on the page. So, when you get rid of details that seem obvious, you make the story better, more captivating, more compelling.

The worry is that sometimes you get rid of too much detail and there’s nothing to ground the reader; heads talk to each other with no setting, bodies float around in a void.

So, it takes skill.

“If a writer of prose knows enough of what he is writing about he may omit things that he knows and the reader, if the writer is writing truly enough, will have a feeling of those things as strongly as though the writer had stated them. The dignity of movement of an ice-berg is due to only one-eighth of it being above water. A writer who omits things because he does not know them only makes hollow places in his writing.”

– Ernest Hemingway in Death in the Afternoon, 1932

It’s a really powerful tool when it’s used well.

The words you leave out? They have impact. Impact? Impact is good.

Below the paywall (sorry, it’s the way to try to encourage me to keep doing this and others to value my thoughts while also buying puppy found) is where the theory came from, an exercise to help understand it, worries about using it, and why it’s cool.