In Defense of Cliche
Aug. 13th, 2010 11:25 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
osprey_archerI watched Love and Other Disasters last night, and it was fun and funny and British and awesome, until the end when the writers, in their admirable desire to avoid the dread trap of dramatic convention -
No, I take that back. I find nothing admirable about their desire to avoid dramatic convention. Their desire is rather a cowardly fear of appearing conventional, and they would replace a satisfying conclusion with a bad metatextual joke than suffer that fate. "Oh look! We know that flying halfway across the world to catch the man you love who you drove away is cliche! Let us RUB YOUR FACE in how cliche it is by replacing it with an anticlimactic dribble of a conclusion which we will justify as realistic."
Realism is an unconvincing defense. It's particularly unconvincing in this case, as the filmmakers don't even attempt to replace the unrealistic reunion they spoof with a realistic one - they skip the lovers' reunion entirely - but it's unconvincing in general too. A story shouldn't be blatantly unrealistic, because that will destroy suspension of disbelief. But the mere fact that an occurrence is realistic doesn't justify its presence in a story. Reality is often boring; dramatic conventions became conventions because they have the capacity, if well told, to be fascinating.
Which is not to say that we should all run out and start stuffing cliche characters and circumstances into our stories. But if the story demands that one lover chase the other after realizing too late that she truly loves him - or that a beggar girl must be a princess - or that the bickering couple must fall in love - don't warp the story to get rid of it. Never mind if your readers can guess where the story is going; never mind even if they can guess some of the stops along the way. There is as much joy in watching a well-loved story unfolded beautifully, as watching the twists of a new story knitted together.
No, I take that back. I find nothing admirable about their desire to avoid dramatic convention. Their desire is rather a cowardly fear of appearing conventional, and they would replace a satisfying conclusion with a bad metatextual joke than suffer that fate. "Oh look! We know that flying halfway across the world to catch the man you love who you drove away is cliche! Let us RUB YOUR FACE in how cliche it is by replacing it with an anticlimactic dribble of a conclusion which we will justify as realistic."
Realism is an unconvincing defense. It's particularly unconvincing in this case, as the filmmakers don't even attempt to replace the unrealistic reunion they spoof with a realistic one - they skip the lovers' reunion entirely - but it's unconvincing in general too. A story shouldn't be blatantly unrealistic, because that will destroy suspension of disbelief. But the mere fact that an occurrence is realistic doesn't justify its presence in a story. Reality is often boring; dramatic conventions became conventions because they have the capacity, if well told, to be fascinating.
Which is not to say that we should all run out and start stuffing cliche characters and circumstances into our stories. But if the story demands that one lover chase the other after realizing too late that she truly loves him - or that a beggar girl must be a princess - or that the bickering couple must fall in love - don't warp the story to get rid of it. Never mind if your readers can guess where the story is going; never mind even if they can guess some of the stops along the way. There is as much joy in watching a well-loved story unfolded beautifully, as watching the twists of a new story knitted together.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-08-13 11:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-15 07:30 pm (UTC)If they had shown it, it would have been funny and satisfying and cliche-undercutting. But instead they skipped it, and only mentioned it in a throwaway comment in the mess of the ending they presented.