smoke and mirrors
Feb. 16th, 2004 02:33 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tanaiseWriting is all about the con games. But ultimately, I think the real trick is making people not care it's a trick.
I love watching magic tricks, even the ones I know how they work. And I'm a fabulous audience because I don't care how you're doing the trick unless you're doing a bad job of it. You can say, "It's magic" and I'll nod and agree with you because unless I know what you're doing it might as well truly be magic. And if you show me the same trick over and over again I will eventually want to know how you did it. And even once you've shown me how you do it, I'll still watch in awe because it's not the trick, it's how the magician does it. I walked around with a magician once, doing a teaser for a show. and I saw him do the same tricks over and over again, and I still loved it. because just because he took the girl's watch off while we were watching her other hand, didn't mean that I wasn't still amazed that he could do it every time.
even once you see the strings, there's still that whole bit where you can watch everything they do, and still be surprised at how well they pull it off, or how no one else noticed. well, and sometimes when you're watching the hand that you know is going to undo the watch, they steal a ring instead. and you are so firmly convinced that you know exactly what they're going to do that you don't even bother noticing anything else, and they blindside you.
This is actually pretty much exactly what I was thinking with dick Francis. or actually with re-reading any good book, particularly of the mystery type. Connie WIllis is amazing at doing it. Once you know what the trick is, some books aren't worth rereading. A lot of romances, for example. but Connie's books, I re-read them to see where she tricked me, and how she did it, and how far back the 'surprise' was set up. Bellwether I read over and over and over again. because everything in that book follows this very careful pattern, but you can't see it until it's a reread. or a re-re-read. and suddenly you go 'oh! that's it! that's the catalyst." Because even though she's been talking about catalysts all along, you didn't know you were supposed to be looking for one. likewise "To Say Nothing of the Dog", where all these 'coincidences' and plot holes turn out to be carefully planned and carefully used.
And I think part of my problem with learning how to do things by reading them is that books like COnnie's are too fancy for me to really take apart and learn from. My brain gets distracted by the pretties, and I can't pay attention to the important things until I'm rereading it for the 47th time, but Dick Francis, who does the same in some of his books, is just...fanfiction...enough that I can concentrate instead on the differences. (likewise romances, though they often do them wrong, which can be just as effective a writing tool, of course). But I know the world, and I don't care who the characters are, and all that matters is how the plot gets set up, and how it gets resolved, and what people did right, and what they did wrong, and how I would do it in that case.
I love watching magic tricks, even the ones I know how they work. And I'm a fabulous audience because I don't care how you're doing the trick unless you're doing a bad job of it. You can say, "It's magic" and I'll nod and agree with you because unless I know what you're doing it might as well truly be magic. And if you show me the same trick over and over again I will eventually want to know how you did it. And even once you've shown me how you do it, I'll still watch in awe because it's not the trick, it's how the magician does it. I walked around with a magician once, doing a teaser for a show. and I saw him do the same tricks over and over again, and I still loved it. because just because he took the girl's watch off while we were watching her other hand, didn't mean that I wasn't still amazed that he could do it every time.
even once you see the strings, there's still that whole bit where you can watch everything they do, and still be surprised at how well they pull it off, or how no one else noticed. well, and sometimes when you're watching the hand that you know is going to undo the watch, they steal a ring instead. and you are so firmly convinced that you know exactly what they're going to do that you don't even bother noticing anything else, and they blindside you.
This is actually pretty much exactly what I was thinking with dick Francis. or actually with re-reading any good book, particularly of the mystery type. Connie WIllis is amazing at doing it. Once you know what the trick is, some books aren't worth rereading. A lot of romances, for example. but Connie's books, I re-read them to see where she tricked me, and how she did it, and how far back the 'surprise' was set up. Bellwether I read over and over and over again. because everything in that book follows this very careful pattern, but you can't see it until it's a reread. or a re-re-read. and suddenly you go 'oh! that's it! that's the catalyst." Because even though she's been talking about catalysts all along, you didn't know you were supposed to be looking for one. likewise "To Say Nothing of the Dog", where all these 'coincidences' and plot holes turn out to be carefully planned and carefully used.
And I think part of my problem with learning how to do things by reading them is that books like COnnie's are too fancy for me to really take apart and learn from. My brain gets distracted by the pretties, and I can't pay attention to the important things until I'm rereading it for the 47th time, but Dick Francis, who does the same in some of his books, is just...fanfiction...enough that I can concentrate instead on the differences. (likewise romances, though they often do them wrong, which can be just as effective a writing tool, of course). But I know the world, and I don't care who the characters are, and all that matters is how the plot gets set up, and how it gets resolved, and what people did right, and what they did wrong, and how I would do it in that case.
