3 ms·
It has been my observation that some people are really bothered by structural or technical problems in storytelling—and, conversely, highly value structurally a
by shantly 7y ago
It has been my observation that some people are really bothered by structural or technical problems in storytelling—and, conversely, highly value structurally and technically sound stories—and others don't seem to notice at all.
This doesn't seem to be a trade-off thing either—I find that few things actually are, just as "the truth lies somewhere in the middle" is more fairy tale than dependable guide—that is, those who appreciate technically-sound storytelling aren't somehow deficient in appreciation of humor or good characterization or well-written dialog or whatever. They are just very bothered by sloppy or poor plotting, while other people don't even notice. (presumably there are also some who notice but do not care, though I believe they're a rare species)
- wrp 7y ago> ...some people are really bothered by structural or technical problems in storytelling...and others don't seem to notice at all. Good point. I was just thinking this while reading reviews from people who loved/hated Haruki Murakami's 1Q84. Some people focus on language/affect and others on plot/information.
- wjnc 7y agoGood distinctions. For fiction I usually read without noticing the scaffolding too much. It's my way to go to sleep. Then I started reading the blog by Steven Erikson after a few Malazan books and noticed how much time he purports to spend on getting sentences, paragraphs and sequences just right. I think that is the beauty in art. There are many layers to investigate. And then some focus on techniques, some on material, some on historical perspective. I think being able to easily get the views of others on arts is one of the big plusses of today.