It seems to have only a form of negative association with the word, from a general listener's perspective.
From a personal perspective, can enthousiasm and trying to follow a chronological explanation from a different
experiential perspective which are a function of our mirron neurons, cognitive, but and causal to the personal perspective and understanding of the world. A story, a narrative which of course depends on the way it is presented.
Anil Seth, sorry if I have posted this before, explains how the conceptual parts of the brain are at least divided and making "best guesses" might be viewed as belabouring a thought......

.
To paint a verbal landscape, and visual observations, a mapping of his understanding and experiential responses this his or her world. IMO, if the listener/viewer can visiualize and identify and have the same understanding as the narrator, then the seemingly gratuitous details may be interpreted as
empathy (understanding and experiencin the same chemical process from another's particular's viewpoint, wherein lie the details of the recognition of a pattern from a new perspective through logic and mathematics, and in presenting a hypothesis; a semi-formal presentation of a new, from a different but possibly relevant perspective accompanied by a wealth of reference materials..
Does this also not suggest a
positive quality, at least to those who are experientially connecting with the narrative. Why read a book on romance, when we all care about is content,
He belabored a point to make sure everyone in the room, understood the importance of the message", a positive reinforcement , IMO.
If seen from such a perspective the motive may seem more benign than as generally portrayed.
A narrative overview of knowledge in preparation to the foundation of a new form of observation and discovery of a natural imperative may well be necessary, at first seemingly sounding mundane, but on which on wich the hypothesis is founded : "Standing on the shoulders of ......".
I believe Anil Set narrative and visually proofs, explains this much better than I can. This translation of "input, processing, and ouput, depends on the accuracy of the fundamental aspects known to exist in association with
known phenomena.
As Seth Anil puts it, "when human hallucinations agree, we call it reality"