Research. Where do you stop?
I think I'll keep the copy of my not-really-rant about research levels using Pushkin example at ffrr here as well.
I can't take that rant out of my head. The Pushkin rant that is. I wonder if anyone else has the same research fears.
Suppose you include an unusual reference in you fic. Like in the rant in question - a Russian literature geek recites a specific verse by Pushkin to his girlfriend. Now you've got several levels of reactions that may or may not be followed by an actual review.
1. Ignorant fanbrat: "You should use real writers."
2. Simply clueless: "Who's that? Whatever."
3. Clueless, but curious: "Who's that?" -> google -> "I see."
4. Someone who's heard about Pushkin: "I get it."
5. Someone who's read Pushkin: "I've read that verse! Cool!"
6. Someone who's suffered through Russian studies: "Why Pushkin? Because he's number one? That's so stereotypical."
7. Someone who's suffered through Russian elementary school: "Oh, god, it's been twenty years and I still can recite it by heart. Why would anyone in his right mind read it to his girlfriend? Everyone in Russia learns this particular verse by the time they are nine. Not quite the equivalent of 'Barney, the dinosaur', but heading there."
8. Someone who's suffered through Russian high school: "Why would anyone read Pushkin to his leaving girlfriend? Go for Blok, Gumilev, or Belyi. These guys really knew about suffering in style."
9. Russian literature geek: "Pushkin is sooo outdated. And so are Blok, Gumilev, or Belyi. Wanna hear my stuff?"
And in the end this is the bottom line, 9 times out of 10 a Russian literature geek would read his own stuff, and in the remaining case, he'd choose a poet he identifies with most, in the exact same situation, and would read a poem that was written for the occasion.
But unless you have an access to a geek like that and can torture him with all kind of questions, you wouldn't know it. Can you event guess the existence of levels 7-9 from the regular research? How do you know when to stop digging? You might be dissatisfied with staying within stereotypes (level 6), but sometimes you cannot even identify the trap's existence. So you basically end up making a contact with the level 4-5 readers. Of course, lots of published authors that are doing the same thing, fail right at the level 6, and they are totally fine with it. But. But... I feel that it's too boring to stay at 4-5, but more details mean more ways to screw up. So I guess the question is how do you find the balance?
Actually, this is the poem in question, for the reference:
"The storm wind covers the sky
Whirling the fleecy snow drifts
Now it howls like a wolf,
Now it is crying, like a lost child.
Let us drink, dearest friend
To my poor wasted youth.
Let us drink from grief
Where's the glass?
Our hearts at least will be lightened."
And the link to that post.
I can't take that rant out of my head. The Pushkin rant that is. I wonder if anyone else has the same research fears.
Suppose you include an unusual reference in you fic. Like in the rant in question - a Russian literature geek recites a specific verse by Pushkin to his girlfriend. Now you've got several levels of reactions that may or may not be followed by an actual review.
1. Ignorant fanbrat: "You should use real writers."
2. Simply clueless: "Who's that? Whatever."
3. Clueless, but curious: "Who's that?" -> google -> "I see."
4. Someone who's heard about Pushkin: "I get it."
5. Someone who's read Pushkin: "I've read that verse! Cool!"
6. Someone who's suffered through Russian studies: "Why Pushkin? Because he's number one? That's so stereotypical."
7. Someone who's suffered through Russian elementary school: "Oh, god, it's been twenty years and I still can recite it by heart. Why would anyone in his right mind read it to his girlfriend? Everyone in Russia learns this particular verse by the time they are nine. Not quite the equivalent of 'Barney, the dinosaur', but heading there."
8. Someone who's suffered through Russian high school: "Why would anyone read Pushkin to his leaving girlfriend? Go for Blok, Gumilev, or Belyi. These guys really knew about suffering in style."
9. Russian literature geek: "Pushkin is sooo outdated. And so are Blok, Gumilev, or Belyi. Wanna hear my stuff?"
And in the end this is the bottom line, 9 times out of 10 a Russian literature geek would read his own stuff, and in the remaining case, he'd choose a poet he identifies with most, in the exact same situation, and would read a poem that was written for the occasion.
But unless you have an access to a geek like that and can torture him with all kind of questions, you wouldn't know it. Can you event guess the existence of levels 7-9 from the regular research? How do you know when to stop digging? You might be dissatisfied with staying within stereotypes (level 6), but sometimes you cannot even identify the trap's existence. So you basically end up making a contact with the level 4-5 readers. Of course, lots of published authors that are doing the same thing, fail right at the level 6, and they are totally fine with it. But. But... I feel that it's too boring to stay at 4-5, but more details mean more ways to screw up. So I guess the question is how do you find the balance?
Actually, this is the poem in question, for the reference:
"The storm wind covers the sky
Whirling the fleecy snow drifts
Now it howls like a wolf,
Now it is crying, like a lost child.
Let us drink, dearest friend
To my poor wasted youth.
Let us drink from grief
Where's the glass?
Our hearts at least will be lightened."
And the link to that post.