Log in

No account? Create an account
12 May 2006 @ 09:32 pm
'The Three Big Cheats'  
Research and writing, the second part of an excellent post by tightropegirl.
: creativecreative
Music Box: Oh My Love ` Inara George
eveningblueeveningblue on May 13th, 2006 02:24 pm (UTC)

Thanks for posting this. After reading her post, I had to friend her even though I don't know her and I don't watch House. She has a lot of interesting things to say about writing.

Actually, reading her post made me think about betas. Maybe I'll write something about that later.
Ith: Lantern Reflectionithildyn on May 13th, 2006 07:40 pm (UTC)
I found out about her a few weeks back. She was the one I linked to who had made the Methos comparison in posting about the last episode of House she wrote.
pat: Duncanpastpat_t on May 13th, 2006 03:45 pm (UTC)
Lol, thanks for pointing to this post.
The same thing happens with subjects the audience is less familiar with. If your protagonist is an FBI agent and he has to go search a house, the audience may hear about a warrant (because we're all familiar with warrants), or we may cut to the house, if time is short, and let the people at home fill in the blanks and assume a warrant was gotten. But if an expert said, "In addition to getting the warrant, your guy should also pick up three copies of a Legalese Nebulous, and have two immediate supervisors sign off on it" -- well, I can only say that both as a writer and as an audience member, I'm happy to skip that part and assume that everything that needed to done was done off-screen. Let's jump ahead to the part where we confront the serial killer.

Of course, there will always be people who assume that if they didn't see it, and the characters didn't talk about it, it didn't happen. (Though for some reason this logic doesn't apply to going to the bathroom.) I can only say that it seems to me that these are the conventions of this kind of storytelling; that every era has its way of expecting an audience to take in what's happening, and these are ours. We were taught fundamentals of reading in school; but this more invisible learning takes place too, as we grow up watching endless repeats of The Rockford Files and film noir festivals on classic movie channels and the constant repetition-and-variation of the romantic comedy.

You have to learn how to absorb a story, just as you have to learn how to tell one. But people don't talk about the former process as much.

ROTFL - the chant of the die-hard "slashers are stupid and don't know canon - if I didn't see it - IT DID NOT HAPPEN" Lord, it was chanted to high heaven when we discussed it on my journal and was even taken to other journals. The idea of interpretation was pooh-poohed. And thc chant began like a mantra.

Ith: Blue Girlithildyn on May 13th, 2006 07:39 pm (UTC)
I don't think that's limited to just slash. I think that's something all fanfic writers are told. I certainly know I have! Other journals huh? I don't get around enough [g]

It just reminded me of something I wanted to post about a few weeks ago, and forogt to! I think it's related. Well, even if it isn't.... :) Tea first, then post!
eveningblue: south park duncaneveningblue on May 13th, 2006 08:29 pm (UTC)
The idea that something didn't happen just because it didn't happen onscreen is just...amazing to me. When that kind of conversation crops up, I have to refrain from posting, because I don't want to call people names. But come on, that's just silly.

Of course, *what* happened offscreen is open to interpretation. But did things happen that we didn't see? OF COURSE.