bear with me, i'm sleepy
So, here's a question. Chekov's Gun: clever foreshadowing or cheap callback? I always get annoyed with uses of it, it's basically the dumbest literary device ever. It's the literary equivalent of a guy masturbating all over himself with how clever s/he is. It's as much foreshadowing as naming your book "Untitled" is postmodern. Even Deus Ex Machina is better, being it at least doesn't pretend not to come out of nowhere, while Chekov's Gun comes along all pretentiously out of the blue like you were supposed to see it coming, like it was actually foreshadowed by being mentioned earlier, either by the most obscure method or even hamfistedly by someone all but shouting "This will be important later!" only to be called back upon at the big reveal with a "See? I told you it would be important!" Poorly thought out plot twists are just lazy, annoying, and way overused.
What about Red Herrings? I want more of those. Especially if you stress the importance of something to the point where everyone in the audience gets the point that it's supposed to be a Chekov's Gun, only to have it never mentioned ever again. That is how you pull one over on the audience.
Now I'm sure there can be fun uses of the device. I'm sure the original context of it had some play with some possibly aristocratic Russian family hanging around in the lounge, which featured a flintlock over the fireplace in the first act. And as things went sour, when the big fight broke out in the third act, somebody grabbed the gun and shot someone else. Maybe the curtain fell as they all, including the shooter, perhaps the headstrong middle son, enraged at how he was usurped of both the spotlight and his fair share of the inheritance, reacted in shock as the victim, let's say the patriarch, on whom the stability of the whole household rested, let out his final breath. I could deal with that. Hell, I'd even write that. But modern Chekov's Guns are all magical artifacts, keys to saving the world, contrived ways of killing the bad guy, getting the girl, living happily ever after. Perhaps the problem isn't so much in the technique itself as the stories it appears in, but either way it's getting old, and yes, I'm talking to you especially, Neil Gaiman.
So what am I trying to say? Well, just quit being lazy. If you're going to write a story, write a good story, not some fucking wank session. We've got enough of those already.
Speaking of Chekov's Gun and things what use it in fun and self-admittedly unexpected ways ("Uh, Dorothy, you do, uh, know that you could've gone home at any time, right? (gosh we'd really feel bad about not telling you earlier if we hadn't planned to use you to kill the witch the whole time)"), you know what would've been fun? I'm totally down with the Wicked Witch of the West, but what's the deal with the Wicked Witch of the East? It'd been way more fun if she was the Evil Enchantress of the East (though, of course, "ding dong the enchantress is dead" doesn't have quite the same ring to it). Then Glinda could've been the Splendid Sorceress of the South and there could've been a Nice, uh, Necromancer of the North? Honestly, it would've been fun.
What about Red Herrings? I want more of those. Especially if you stress the importance of something to the point where everyone in the audience gets the point that it's supposed to be a Chekov's Gun, only to have it never mentioned ever again. That is how you pull one over on the audience.
Now I'm sure there can be fun uses of the device. I'm sure the original context of it had some play with some possibly aristocratic Russian family hanging around in the lounge, which featured a flintlock over the fireplace in the first act. And as things went sour, when the big fight broke out in the third act, somebody grabbed the gun and shot someone else. Maybe the curtain fell as they all, including the shooter, perhaps the headstrong middle son, enraged at how he was usurped of both the spotlight and his fair share of the inheritance, reacted in shock as the victim, let's say the patriarch, on whom the stability of the whole household rested, let out his final breath. I could deal with that. Hell, I'd even write that. But modern Chekov's Guns are all magical artifacts, keys to saving the world, contrived ways of killing the bad guy, getting the girl, living happily ever after. Perhaps the problem isn't so much in the technique itself as the stories it appears in, but either way it's getting old, and yes, I'm talking to you especially, Neil Gaiman.
So what am I trying to say? Well, just quit being lazy. If you're going to write a story, write a good story, not some fucking wank session. We've got enough of those already.
Speaking of Chekov's Gun and things what use it in fun and self-admittedly unexpected ways ("Uh, Dorothy, you do, uh, know that you could've gone home at any time, right? (gosh we'd really feel bad about not telling you earlier if we hadn't planned to use you to kill the witch the whole time)"), you know what would've been fun? I'm totally down with the Wicked Witch of the West, but what's the deal with the Wicked Witch of the East? It'd been way more fun if she was the Evil Enchantress of the East (though, of course, "ding dong the enchantress is dead" doesn't have quite the same ring to it). Then Glinda could've been the Splendid Sorceress of the South and there could've been a Nice, uh, Necromancer of the North? Honestly, it would've been fun.