In late, out early
August 15th 2009 04:20
I think the best thing that writing teacher in this film course has taught me is "Get in late, get out early". I'd never heard the expression before.
There's different ways to interpret this, but I guess I essentially see it as instruction about temporal framing. Given an event that would usually be depicted as running from A to Z, you the writer have a choice as to how much or how little of that time period to include -- and, arguably, it's more interesting to go from B to Y than A to Z. You could think of it as starting a scene leaving the beginning of it implied (then the audience has to do a little work to catch up), and exiting the scene before its natural end (leaving the audience in suspense, or making them do a little thinking to work out what happens next). Either way, you're engaging them.
The first part of this was known at the time of Virgil. The Roman expression is "in media re" -- literally, "in the middle of the thing" -- starting in the middle of action.
I suppose "Life with the boring bits cut out" (no idea who first said that) is similar.
Roland Barthes in S/Z talks about the way there's often set phases to descriptions. Set moments the audience is expecting.
Take, for instance, a description of a date. What do you expect? There's a bit where someone is picked up. Then there's a movie, or a dinner, or a trip to an amusement park. Then there's a walk afterwards. A kiss or no kiss by the door. Then sex or no sex to conclude the evening. -- There's patterns. I suppose you could call them "cliches", but I think they're better described as expectations or conventions.
I sometimes think that most of a writer's job is working with or against expectations. In particular, expectations of language (verbal cliches), and expectations of narrative. After all, it's because of such patterns that the audience is able to fill in the blanks when you get in late and get out early.
There's different ways to interpret this, but I guess I essentially see it as instruction about temporal framing. Given an event that would usually be depicted as running from A to Z, you the writer have a choice as to how much or how little of that time period to include -- and, arguably, it's more interesting to go from B to Y than A to Z. You could think of it as starting a scene leaving the beginning of it implied (then the audience has to do a little work to catch up), and exiting the scene before its natural end (leaving the audience in suspense, or making them do a little thinking to work out what happens next). Either way, you're engaging them.
The first part of this was known at the time of Virgil. The Roman expression is "in media re" -- literally, "in the middle of the thing" -- starting in the middle of action.
I suppose "Life with the boring bits cut out" (no idea who first said that) is similar.
***
Roland Barthes (1915-80)
Take, for instance, a description of a date. What do you expect? There's a bit where someone is picked up. Then there's a movie, or a dinner, or a trip to an amusement park. Then there's a walk afterwards. A kiss or no kiss by the door. Then sex or no sex to conclude the evening. -- There's patterns. I suppose you could call them "cliches", but I think they're better described as expectations or conventions.
I sometimes think that most of a writer's job is working with or against expectations. In particular, expectations of language (verbal cliches), and expectations of narrative. After all, it's because of such patterns that the audience is able to fill in the blanks when you get in late and get out early.
| 70 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog