Lately when I write I have been wondering why cliches are so rallied against, particularly from a visual sense. The whole idea of certain conventions in storytelling isn't to be realistic or original, it's to spice up a scene. trenchcoats, rain, fire, wind, cloaks, cigars, booze, paintings, windows, water, signs and more are all things I use to visually spice up a scene that would otherwise be boring. These things are often neither essential to the scene at hand, nor very inventive in the grand scheme of literature, but it just wouldn't be as interesting if I replaced a powerful, driving nighttime rainstorm with, say, a bagel.
This extends to the plots themselves. Allow me a list of some of the things I absolutely love to do in stories (and see in stories):
Last-minute cavalry style rescues
Big, dark offices where meetings take place entirely in ominous proclamations
Fights to the death, preferrably if one or both combatants fall off something significantly tall at the end
Ambushes
People standing atop windswept heights while their coats flap around them
Cheesy one-liners
Insane exposions the size of half of Texas
Dramatic deaths
I like all these things because fiction should not be entirely realistic. What's the point of that? If I want eighteen pages of two people talking, I can go do that. If, on the other hand, I want to see someone ride a galloping, fire-breathing monstrosity while having a showdown with a dastardly villain, I need fiction. It's a cliche, but if dropping cliches means making boring stories, bring on the tried and true.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
You know, the only time I have a probelm with cliches, is when there are too many crammed into a limited space. But, they do work. and they can add something to a scene, so I'll never begrudge anyone who uses them(I use them myself).
Post a Comment