[mattjaynes]

No, this is not simply "long-form", this is "in medias res" where the story starts at a heightened moment of tension, then abruptly stops and rewinds to go back to fill in details of how they got to this exciting moment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_medias_res

Sometimes it's done to great effect, like in Fight Club (film starts with him at the climax with a gun in his mouth, then rewinds and tells the story).

However, it is often used as a clumsy device by novice writers. They use it to get the audience to stick around for their mostly boring story.

I see this a lot on Youtube. The Youtuber will start with a compelling question and story, like "There he was... tied to the wall as he watched the firing squad load their weapons with gun powder.... But before we continue our story, what is gun powder? Well, it's composed of potassium nitrate, blah, blah, blah...."

You can tell if "in medias res" is done well or poorly by how you react to it. If you are excited for the detour, then it's done well. If instead it feels like a long annoying interruption you want to skip, then it's done poorly.

For me, it's done poorly in this article. I read the first compelling section, then the writer slows everything down to a snail's pace to go into some very dry history of NASA without ever really giving a good payoff to the story he opened with.

[no-dr-onboard]

"In medias res" vs "longform" is an important distinction, as you've highlighted. As the parent commented, a lot of this has to do with how we frame the article via the title. The title sets the expectation for the article. In this case, it provides a misleading ethos for discerning audiences.

[ffomni]

But the title was not "This is what happened to Taylor Wang". It's about a general question. His particular case was just the opener. The rest of the article tells what's promised in the title, not what you maybe expected when hoping to read about the story of a single person.

[bonestamp2]

I watched Dumb Money (2023) last night and it starts this same way. It was completely unnecessary, was done in a confusing way, and this plot device didn't add anything to enhance the excitement of the story. A completely linear plot would have been just fine, especially since everyone knows the story gets more interesting (even from the trailer alone). In fact, the interesting part of the story that most people don't know is the beginning... how it all started before it was exciting.

It was still an entertaining movie, so I wouldn't let this one poor choice deter anyone.

[JohnBooty]

    I see this a lot on Youtube. 

Purely subjectively, I find it way more egregious and annoying on Youtube (because YT won't monetize shorter articles) and less convenient to skim past if you don't like the structure of the video.

    You can tell if "in medias res" is done well or 
    poorly by how you react to it. If you are excited 
    for the detour, then it's done well

I was a maybe little frustrated here, but we already know the ending of the story, right? The guy did return from space. The guy did not open the hatch and kill the crew. Pretty sure we'd all remember that.

So with that in mind I thought the detour into "what brought this dude to the point where he was refusing commands from Mission Control" was quite welcome.

[FpUser]

>"I see this a lot on Youtube. The Youtuber will start with a compelling question and story, like "There he was... tied to the wall as he watched the firing squad load their weapons with gun powder.... But before we continue our story, what is gun powder? Well, it's composed of potassium nitrate, blah, blah, blah...."

It gets even worse. Looking for answer to particular question and hits the video that claims to have it. Let's say concise answer is 5 words. The video is 30 minutes long with those 5 words spaced evenly throughout.

[narag]

So it has a name...

I'm sick and tired of flashback overuse in recent series, mostly to explain the feeeeelings of the characters and so justify their stupid behaviour.

But this must be the ultimate abuse: most of the story is a flashback. Ouch!

[aidenn0]

To be even more overused, make sure the flashbacks describe a trauma plot[1].

1: https://archive.is/VdZ14

[ycombinete]

Ian Kung poked fun at this wonderfully: https://youtu.be/HySlYLkFieQ?si=ugnFU7PhgZmEXaXn

[GeoAtreides]

> No, this is not simply "long-form", this is "in medias res"

This is like saying: This is not simply a mug, this is porcelain. Narrative and narrative technique are two different things, just like the function of an object is different thing than the material of the object.

It's also probably just a hook, not a full "in media res".

[hilux]

I read the article all the way to the end, and thought it was fascinating.

The author is a very accomplished writer, with a journalism Masters from a top program, and 25 years experience.

[PH95VuimJjqBqy]

yeah, I basically skipped over everything looking for the answer to "what happened after that" because I didn't give a shit about anything else.

and yes, I hate this form of writing too.