In a discussion of why Dennis Miller isn't funny, someone remembered when Miller was doing color for Monday Night Football he made a reference to Romulus and Remus. The implication was that Miller was stupid for expecting fans of the NFL to get or appreciate the riff.
Miller's not funny, but it's not because he overestimates his audience.
I promise, this is about writing, so bear with me.
When I was a kid I read Mad Magazine. They never pulled a punchline because their readership was eight years old. No, they treated me like I was smart enough to get the joke, even when I wasn't.
In my WIP (see, I told you we'd get to writing) I refer to a lot of cultural things that were around in 1941. Radio shows, books, and a lot of popular music. One reader in my writer's group complained that I referred to bands he'd never heard of. He suggested I'd lose readers this way.I didn't say this at the time, but I wondered if every time I made some reference to some cultural phenomenon of the period I should call the Average Reader and ask if this was a part of their normal cultural lexicon.
So the question for the day is, do you ever pull back from a bit of esoterica because you're afraid you'll lose your audience? And if not (as I suspect), can you remember worrying about it? At all? And when you encounter unknowns in others' writing, do you stop to look it up as I do every other page in Patrick O'Brian's books, or do you fly on by, getting the gist from the context?
That's all for Friday. Have a good weekend.
8 comments:
In a historical piece, part of the charm is the stuff you've never heard of before. When I read, say, one of the Falco novels, it's the stuff I didn't already know about ancient Rome that adds spice.
The only reason to pull back from that is if you're shoving too much research in at the expense of the story. But if your writing group person is complaining solely because "I've never heard of this stuff," then perhaps historical fiction is not for him. I'm being kind here.
I love stuff I've never heard of before. If I need to know what it is and don't get a sense from the contact, I'll go Google it. Have learned great things that way.
The best emails I've gotten from readers are the ones about some small obscure detail in the book that they love and didn't know anyone else was into--Bob Wills and The Texas Playboys' pedal steel player was one guy's grandfather--his father started a guitar store in Socal. He sent me t-shirts. GREAT guy. That never would've happened if I'd thought, "gee, maybe I should make my protag play 'Achy Breaky Heart' on the jukebox in that skanky dive bar. The average reader might not be familiar enough with Hank Williams and Bob Wills these days."
I guess I figure that "the average reader" doesn't actually read. They're too busy watching Survivor XXIII or what have you. Readers are bizarre people, in the best possible way. Like writers, only with slightly less typing.
Many times I do much the same as you do.
Sometimes it's curiosity, but more often than not it's because the author has used it as a reference point.
I've found out about a lot of good authors, music, and other books with similar subject matter.
A month later I look at my bank account and realize that once again I've screwed up my budget.
-SDA
Don't worry. You're doing it right David, or at least that's my opinion. I pick up a term or reference here every once in a while that I'm curious about or driven in some way to look up and learn more about. What was said above by Rhoades and Read makes sense. TV watchers aren't readers, and researchers aren't writers, although writers do some research.
It's the obscure details that make an piece historical come alive. So what if they've never heard of Amos and Andy, or McGee's Closet. Those were things of the time and those are important details that shouldn't be glossed over.
At the same time, you can go overboard. I was critiquing a guy's Civil War novel once. Nice guy. Not a bad writer. But he was an historian first and a fiction writer second. Or maybe eighth or ninth.
Anyway, he had a description of one guy's breakfast and all the things they had to make do with because of the war.
Fascinating detail, but it just hurt to read. Not because I didn't know what those things were, but because he went on for SIX PAGES.
So, keep in the detail and trust your instincts. Just not the ones that usually land you in jail.
As long as there's enough context to get an idea of what the esoterica is (band, book, movie, whatever), I like them. Sometimes I'll look it up, sometimes I just let 'em go by. But Stephen's right - too much loving detail can drown the story and your reader's interest right along with it.
Fuck 'em if they don't get it. I've had stuff I don't get from American novels of the 30s and it doesn't make me give up, just prompts me to do some homework if I want to when I'm finished with the book.
Dave, you're not going to be the guy to drown your story in esoterica (you're more concerned with pace, I think), so I wouldn't worry about it.
Ray,
Thanks for the vote of confidence.
Part of this comes from the character, fresh out of prison after 16 years, with all that had changed between 1924 and 1941. How could he not be curious about talking pictures, jazz clubs and radio shows?
And I've had the same experience with books from the UK. If a writer mentions a TV celeb or brand of cereal I don't know, it's not going to throw me out of the story.
As you so cogently put it, fuck 'em if they don't get it.
Post a Comment