I had an interesting point of contention with someone on road construction. The point that was made was that you could repave and change an entire area, yet the results would not be cosmetic. My argument is, if you can't see it at all, why does it take a year or more in order to do it? Sounds like an issue that will not be solved by me or the other person, but that brings up a good point. If you make references that are not cosmetic but people don't notice them, are they even references at all? Things are rather shaky when you think about what is noticed by the reader and what isn't.
One of the issues regarding details is that sometimes, you can make things mundane and bogged down by providing too much or too little detail. I've read a lot of books by Stephen King and Elmore Leonard. So when they make a reference which is to another book they have written, I understand it. But what if that reference is read by a person who never reads another one of their books? Does it fly over their head, prevent their desire to read further into the story because it appears confusing or simply appear as if it was written badly? King writes a lot about a clown with silver dollars for eyes which make confuse those readers who never read IT.
This type of layering of plot is interesting to the insider who wants to write in detailed fashion. Some details are extraneous in nature. I find that some of the more detail that I provide ends up being lost by the reader. Why? Because most people are half-reading anyway. They are looking for plot, following a story-line or a character. A lot of them may focus on the green potted plant if it becomes a part of the story-line, but that doesn't mean they will care if the storyline doesn't include the plant at all beyond that sentence.
The NFL Draft is tonight. A 96 hour marathon where guys names are read off. Then the analysts go over every detail of the player's life story. This is supposed to tie the viewer to the team decision, and also why they selected the player. But some of the details that the NFL teams focus on are absolutely ridiculous. How a guy scored on the Wonderlic test is extraneous information. So is how many times he ran a four-two-thirty in the grand scheme of things. None of things speak to the heart of a player or how what their threshold of pain is when someone hits them.
Characters are build through layering. But not merely gimmicks which suggest the guy smokes without cause. He smokes with a reason, doesn't he? Otherwise, he would have put it out when the first people asked him to. In the film, Sexy Beast, Ben Kingsley's character refuses to put out his cigarette on an airplane when the flight attendant asks. He suggests he put in out in her eye. What does that tell you about his character? He's an ass, and a scary man who is tough.
Some of the details are cosmetic but suggest more about the character than simply, "he smokes."
If he smokes, it means something. If he beats his wife, it means something. If he gets beaten by his wife, it means something too.
Too much construction of a character, scene or page focused on the internal without giving enough personal details that you should notice when reading. Whether it is the first time you've read that author or the fiftieth. That means when you go by that construction side, you should at least notice that the curb has ADA compliance or new white paint. If you don't, it can suggest that there isn't enough there to look closer.
No comments:
Post a Comment