If you need to build not only a person’s understanding of new physics but also how language works, how senses work, and lay an entirely new foundation, that’s a lot of work to get a person into the story you’re telling. The more familiar the elements, the faster they sink in.
-
Show this thread
-
However. Weak storytellers who’ve not developed their skills believe tropes and archetypes are all that’s necessary for a story. They saturate the market with shallow repeats of the same dross over and over. Creative types overreact by proudly shunning any familiarity at all.
1 reply 3 retweets 35 likesShow this thread -
You can check the shelves at your local collapsing bookstore to see what a system which abhors familiarity does to general appeal. Note the growing toy section in Barnes & Noble. Did you know they only stay afloat by selling store locations every year? Eventually they’ll run out
2 replies 4 retweets 38 likesShow this thread -
Humans need familiar touchstones to feel immersed in a story without having to constantly pause and remember new facts. But how much familiarity? Too much and we become bored. More than that: Not enough depth creates lack of motivation to learn.
2 replies 4 retweets 34 likesShow this thread -
The lesson here for authors is there’s a long spectrum running from shallow archetypes & tropes to abrasively avant garde. The key ingredient: Depth. You start with an archetype. What’s under the surface? What human experiences made them into that archetype? How will they grow?
1 reply 3 retweets 30 likesShow this thread -
Dynamic characters who have a reason to be their archetype and eventually grow beyond their archetype are absolutely adored. Harry Potter is a classic example of a sad orphan abused by unloving people. An archetype. Gandalf is an archetype. Ned Stark. Superman. Then a twist.
2 replies 3 retweets 30 likesShow this thread -
This is where so many creators go wrong. They twist too far and make the character alien and unrelatable. Or they don’t twist far enough and the character feels flat and stale. The twist should either arise from their backstory for being the archetype or should interplay with it
1 reply 3 retweets 31 likesShow this thread -
Harry’s twist is that he’s a wizard. This arises from the reason he’s an unloved orphan archetype abused by a cruel system. It also interacts with that backstory by shaping what kind of man he becomes as he makes choices on morality.
1 reply 3 retweets 24 likesShow this thread -
The best characters do both because the twist forces them to confront their past and mindfully shape their future. And this is why we really need that familiarity. Because the story needs to ring true, and that means we need to know what we believe the character SHOULD do.
1 reply 3 retweets 28 likesShow this thread -
Consistent cries of “It doesn’t make sense that the character did that” arise from too much alienation in the familiarity window. People can predict what should happen for that archetype. They WANT to see it fulfilled. Like a destiny. It’s satisfying.
1 reply 3 retweets 30 likesShow this thread
So in summation, if you want to appeal to a wide audience: Mind the opposing pull between familiar and new. Provide a familiar entry for your audience. Twist in such a way it makes sense for past and future. Provide dynamic depth without alienating.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Saluti you can read it here: Thread by
@TheBrometheus: "A lot of modern storytellers, critics, and reviewer types lament these things called tropes, literary and rhetorical dev […]" https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1128455903043211264.html … Share this if you think it's interesting.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.