Re-creation

We often try too hard to capture something in writing much more description than needed. Often to the detriment of the narrative. There is a technique used in post-production where rather than try to reproduce a real world thing exactly, which would be time consuming and unnecessary for say a three second shot of a rainbow. They rather capture the essence of the thing in question. Take our rainbow example.

It is certainly possible to create a rainbow using a computer, one that would be indistinguishable to the real thing but it would be a time consuming process to capture the subtle hues that glimmer in a rainbow. So instead of wasting the money they ask not what is a rainbow but what do people expect a rainbow. Try it now, write down five words you would associate with a rainbow. Bright, Colourful, sparkling, beautiful, stunning etc I would be willing to bet that your list is somewhat like that one. Yet if you were to go outside and record one on film you might get snatches of the some of the above but only once in a blue moon would you get the 'Rainbow' that immediately comes to mind.

Did you know that silencers are not really silent? The more accurate term to describe them are suppressors. In the 'real' world the sound escaping one of them would be on par to a car door slamming. It is quiet enough to stop an inquisitive guard from immediately knowing that a gun had been fired but not to keep him oblivious. This is another example of playing to the audiences expectations. Because in Hollywood we have been told silencers are silent then they remain so.

So next time you are writing try to think that you don't need to perfectly craft a immaculate representation of what you are trying to describe but rather if you are able to get the quintessential essence of what makes up that thing then your writing will be the better for it. You are showing the object to the audience, not creating it from nothing and parsing it into their minds.