While working this week, I've been listening to Brandon Sanderson's BYU lecture series.
Between those lectures and this article, I now have a much better understanding of why I become jaded when consuming storytelling content - no matter the medium.
Sometimes, writers don't give me a good reason to care about any of the Ws, especially the …
While working this week, I've been listening to Brandon Sanderson's BYU lecture series.
Between those lectures and this article, I now have a much better understanding of why I become jaded when consuming storytelling content - no matter the medium.
Sometimes, writers don't give me a good reason to care about any of the Ws, especially the Why.
Two recent experiences with this: Jack Kerouac's On the Road and also Philip K. Dick's Valis.
Maybe I am about to commit literature war crimes by saying this.
For Kerouac, I ended up Googling the prose that is the most famous just to read those sections. I'll get back to Valis when I am ready to read a piece of philosophy - because I thought it would be a vaguely coherent "story" from the outset.
Having said that, I just finished Cannery Row by John Steinbeck, and I am not sure I can identify the Why in that book either - but the Who and prose was so potent it didn't matter. I do feel it was incredibly grounded in Mon
The other aspect to this is the W's establish promises about what you are reading. When the payoffs don't arrive or there is a subversion of the promises, it's incredibly unsatisfying - and annoying.
I can't stand a twist that doesn't make any sense or character arcs that change just to cause more drama in a story. I know now that is because it breaks a promise made between us and the characters - it changes the Ws (Who and Why). Sure, twists and subversion can be clever storytelling devices when set up well - but especially in a lot of TV/Film it feels contrived and loses the Why or makes me wonder Why I cared in the first place.
While working this week, I've been listening to Brandon Sanderson's BYU lecture series.
Between those lectures and this article, I now have a much better understanding of why I become jaded when consuming storytelling content - no matter the medium.
Sometimes, writers don't give me a good reason to care about any of the Ws, especially the Why.
Two recent experiences with this: Jack Kerouac's On the Road and also Philip K. Dick's Valis.
Maybe I am about to commit literature war crimes by saying this.
For Kerouac, I ended up Googling the prose that is the most famous just to read those sections. I'll get back to Valis when I am ready to read a piece of philosophy - because I thought it would be a vaguely coherent "story" from the outset.
Having said that, I just finished Cannery Row by John Steinbeck, and I am not sure I can identify the Why in that book either - but the Who and prose was so potent it didn't matter. I do feel it was incredibly grounded in Mon
The other aspect to this is the W's establish promises about what you are reading. When the payoffs don't arrive or there is a subversion of the promises, it's incredibly unsatisfying - and annoying.
I can't stand a twist that doesn't make any sense or character arcs that change just to cause more drama in a story. I know now that is because it breaks a promise made between us and the characters - it changes the Ws (Who and Why). Sure, twists and subversion can be clever storytelling devices when set up well - but especially in a lot of TV/Film it feels contrived and loses the Why or makes me wonder Why I cared in the first place.