In yesterday's blog, I commented that I didn't put great store in Chekhov's Gun, or the principle that one should only include objects in a story that will come into play later in the plot. I learned about the principle at about the time I wrote a novel for the first time (i.e. when my husband remarked that, if I was going to keep writing short stories around the dream I interrogated, I might as well write a novel).
I took Chekhov's Gun to heart, writing extremely sparse descriptions of people and places, figuring that description would distract from the plot if they couldn't drive it. Big mistake -- I had written 300-some pages with almost nothing but dialogue driving the plot. Don't get me wrong -- I love writing dialogue; I think it's one of my strong points. But the lack of description turned the book into something resembling cream of mushroom soup -- bland, pale, lacking distinction.
And I, being too close to my work, saw nothing wrong with it and sent out a few queries to agents. Sixty-five to be exact. I got sixty-five rejections (I think; not all agents send rejections). I read my work again, and Richard read my work again, and he pointed out that I needed more description. I didn't know what he meant at first. It took me a while to realize that I didn't have to take Chekhov's Gun quite that seriously, and I decided to examine the spirit, rather than the letter, of Chekhov's Gun.
What I didn't realize was that Chekhov's Gun refers to objects that can be used, not all inanimate objects in a scene. The hideous 60's wallpaper in the protagonist's living room can set up a lot of information about the protagonist -- it may reflect her "living in the past", it could show that she can't afford to redecorate her living room or that she hasn't noticed the outdated decor. But even though she's not going to USE the wallpaper in the future, it deserves to be described. People deserve to be described (although I get irked by the JD Robb version: "... although she didn't like looking in mirrors, she looked in the mirror at her eyes the color of good whiskey; her choppy hair the color of deerhide..." This character who doesn't like looking at mirrors is now sitting in front of one with a thesaurus.)
On the other hand, objects that can be used by the protagonists or others are subject to the Chekhov's Gun rule. If the writer points out the blender in that kitchen, or the gun in the canister of flour. or the TV remote in the living room, they should use it later in the story. If the character reads a book called "Starved Rock Murders", the writer should take her to Starved Rock State Park later, preferably when there's a murder. If the writer singles out a specific landmark, you should use that landmark later, but if it's part of a large amount of landscape description, not so much.
It was a learning experience -- describe, describe, describe; let important objects play in the background; don't emphasize any old object that won't be used later. And seek out readers before sending queries out!
This is another technical part of writing a book that i did not know about. I have not ever attempted to write a book and I assumed that you simply tell the story, adding plot twists and descriptions when needed. With each book that you write you learn more and you improve. I am sure that this blog helps your writing. When you post small segments from your books I read and I comment. I ask questions that i the reader would like an explanation about. I hope my comments are helpful and provide you appropriate feedback.
ReplyDeleteThis is Lanetta
I really do appreciate you following me and making comments, Lanetta! I read them all and sometimes forget to respond later. The tools and concepts (foreshadowing, Chekhov's Gun, action verbs) are things I've just learned recently, which is why I've used them very awkwardly in the past. I hope I'm learning about writing as I go. (I thought I was a natural and didn't need to improve -- ha!)
ReplyDeleteYou're providing something I desperately need -- feedback!