the avoidance of cliche isn't about not using certain tropes, it's about really looking at whatever it is you're writing about, not just recycling conventional ways of seeing things.
I think the two go together, and part of creativity is being able to take a trope or cliche and do something different with it or use it in a way that adds something new. The problem is that they appeal to our innate mental laziness, and it's hard to break out of that. :/
I really should have been polite enough to address what you actually meant, rather than leaping in with my "theatre isn't necessarily naturalistic!" schtick. I'm sorry about that.
Oh no, that's fine. I was just concerned that what I'd written didn't make sense on some level, which is always kind of a concern with what I write.
It's hard to work out how much the reader actually needs to know for the story to work.
It absolutely is. Pacing is hard to really get right. I know I often worry about events going by too fast, since I like to cut out a lot or gloss over things. Sometimes it's hard to find a balance between too much and too little.
In the 19th century there was a German author called Fontane who used to write about Berlin, and one day a lady came up to him and said how exciting she found his books because "I know all the street names!" He was very upset...
Oh man, that's the kind of feedback that it's hard to know how to respond to.
And yeah, using brand names is one of those things that definitely bugs me in general. It can work in certain, very specific contexts; I'm thinking specifically of satirical or self-aware works that focus on people who are focused on brand names. (Bret Easton Ellis's American Psycho is sort of my go-to example of this.) I think a lot of instances of over-specificity, from directions to brand names, are optional, but it depends a lot on what the writer is trying to achieve. Most things that don't work on a general level can be used well by authors who are aware of what they're doing and why. Which is always sort of the problem with saying, "Don't do that." Someone out there will always ruin it by doing it well.
For what it's worth, I have been to Bombay, and nothing about "Aching Like Birds" struck me as unrealistic. In fact, I didn't even think about it in those terms until I read your post.
Well, I'm glad to hear that. I kind of regret bringing it up, although it is something I wasn't totally satisfied with. I'm never sure how much should be said about something I've written, since it influences how people read it. Which is probably giving myself too much credit, but hey.
I think the two go together, and part of creativity is being able to take a trope or cliche and do something different with it or use it in a way that adds something new. The problem is that they appeal to our innate mental laziness, and it's hard to break out of that. :/
I really should have been polite enough to address what you actually meant, rather than leaping in with my "theatre isn't necessarily naturalistic!" schtick. I'm sorry about that.
Oh no, that's fine. I was just concerned that what I'd written didn't make sense on some level, which is always kind of a concern with what I write.
It's hard to work out how much the reader actually needs to know for the story to work.
It absolutely is. Pacing is hard to really get right. I know I often worry about events going by too fast, since I like to cut out a lot or gloss over things. Sometimes it's hard to find a balance between too much and too little.
In the 19th century there was a German author called Fontane who used to write about Berlin, and one day a lady came up to him and said how exciting she found his books because "I know all the street names!" He was very upset...
Oh man, that's the kind of feedback that it's hard to know how to respond to.
And yeah, using brand names is one of those things that definitely bugs me in general. It can work in certain, very specific contexts; I'm thinking specifically of satirical or self-aware works that focus on people who are focused on brand names. (Bret Easton Ellis's American Psycho is sort of my go-to example of this.) I think a lot of instances of over-specificity, from directions to brand names, are optional, but it depends a lot on what the writer is trying to achieve. Most things that don't work on a general level can be used well by authors who are aware of what they're doing and why. Which is always sort of the problem with saying, "Don't do that." Someone out there will always ruin it by doing it well.
For what it's worth, I have been to Bombay, and nothing about "Aching Like Birds" struck me as unrealistic. In fact, I didn't even think about it in those terms until I read your post.
Well, I'm glad to hear that. I kind of regret bringing it up, although it is something I wasn't totally satisfied with. I'm never sure how much should be said about something I've written, since it influences how people read it. Which is probably giving myself too much credit, but hey.
Reply
Leave a comment