Great post! Your comment re: "flatness of character" reminds me of how Scott McCloud talks about character detail in Understanding Comics. In many comics and graphic novels, especially for kids, the hero/protagonist is drawn in a cartoon-ish style with few details, whereas the villain might be very detailed. Scott's theory is that we can "see ourselves" more easily in a character made of just a few lines, and we are more likely to "other" a character who is drawn in great detail. He argues that the most universal character in comics-language is the smiley face, which can be a stand-in for us all.
Totally agree. In class, I bought up a similar point. How a character like Calvin (from and Hobbes) might wear the same clothes every day and be drawn the same, but feel more complex and fleshed out than many novel characters.
An interesting viewpoint! I spend a lot of time writing fairy tales, both rewriting traditional ones and assembling new ones out of pieces, so of course I have a bunch of "but what about xyz?" (for instance, in my reading fairy tales are almost all didactic, which is another departure from standard advice) but it's very interesting to see the form contrasted with traditional literary advice.
I do wish more people in the writing / writing advice world would be willing to take this kind of thoughtful, critical look at the world's traditional oral traditions. They are the bedrock of all fiction-- including fantasy, yes, but also literary realism, mystery, romance and everything else.
I wouldn’t say “flatness,” I’d say archetypal. Being archetypal, the character is already so well known it can be understood with a minimum of cues. Jack the poor but wiley farm lad embodies all those traits we infer from his youth, his role and his milieu.
Flatness is Bernheimer's term, but I agree archetypal works too. It's a flat type of archetype though for sure, as Bernheimer points out most fairy tales have only one or two adjectives for a character. Often just the "younger sister" or what not.
I love drawing inspiration from fairytales and stories like them - there's a drive in literary fiction toward the hyperspecific, but the true glue of storytelling is universality!
Great analysis. That reminded me of the conflict between pedagogy (aimed at children) and andragogy (aimed at adults). In andragogy, we must focus on why the adult must learn, the benefits of learning and exposing the educational content based primarily on facts. A friend used to say that andragogy is for boring, unmotivated people without imagination. Most writing rules, especially scriptwriting rules, consider the same general public.
I so enjoy this. Yes, I think too often the advice in creative writing courses is severely limited, and favors the specific style which happens to be currently in vogue. I've been rereading a ton of Austen recently, and even in these more "realistic" works there are plenty of theatrical and fairy-tale qualities--whether relating to prose style, character or story structure. I feel like in our realism-saturated literary landscape, embracing fairy tales is, indeed, a good antidote.
Hi Lincoln, A very interesting piece. I edit Facts & Fiction storytelling magazine which concentrates on oral storytelling, folk/fairy tales etc. We're UK based but have readers all over the world. I'd very much like to include this piece in the next issue (May) if that is OK with you. No money involved of course, we just break even! but I can include your web site details etc. Please let me know asap if you agree to this. Have a browse of my web site and you can contact me through that. https://petecastle.co.uk
Great post! Your comment re: "flatness of character" reminds me of how Scott McCloud talks about character detail in Understanding Comics. In many comics and graphic novels, especially for kids, the hero/protagonist is drawn in a cartoon-ish style with few details, whereas the villain might be very detailed. Scott's theory is that we can "see ourselves" more easily in a character made of just a few lines, and we are more likely to "other" a character who is drawn in great detail. He argues that the most universal character in comics-language is the smiley face, which can be a stand-in for us all.
Totally agree. In class, I bought up a similar point. How a character like Calvin (from and Hobbes) might wear the same clothes every day and be drawn the same, but feel more complex and fleshed out than many novel characters.
An interesting viewpoint! I spend a lot of time writing fairy tales, both rewriting traditional ones and assembling new ones out of pieces, so of course I have a bunch of "but what about xyz?" (for instance, in my reading fairy tales are almost all didactic, which is another departure from standard advice) but it's very interesting to see the form contrasted with traditional literary advice.
I do wish more people in the writing / writing advice world would be willing to take this kind of thoughtful, critical look at the world's traditional oral traditions. They are the bedrock of all fiction-- including fantasy, yes, but also literary realism, mystery, romance and everything else.
I wouldn’t say “flatness,” I’d say archetypal. Being archetypal, the character is already so well known it can be understood with a minimum of cues. Jack the poor but wiley farm lad embodies all those traits we infer from his youth, his role and his milieu.
Flatness is Bernheimer's term, but I agree archetypal works too. It's a flat type of archetype though for sure, as Bernheimer points out most fairy tales have only one or two adjectives for a character. Often just the "younger sister" or what not.
I love drawing inspiration from fairytales and stories like them - there's a drive in literary fiction toward the hyperspecific, but the true glue of storytelling is universality!
Great analysis. That reminded me of the conflict between pedagogy (aimed at children) and andragogy (aimed at adults). In andragogy, we must focus on why the adult must learn, the benefits of learning and exposing the educational content based primarily on facts. A friend used to say that andragogy is for boring, unmotivated people without imagination. Most writing rules, especially scriptwriting rules, consider the same general public.
Writing a fairytale for grownups atm 👍
I so enjoy this. Yes, I think too often the advice in creative writing courses is severely limited, and favors the specific style which happens to be currently in vogue. I've been rereading a ton of Austen recently, and even in these more "realistic" works there are plenty of theatrical and fairy-tale qualities--whether relating to prose style, character or story structure. I feel like in our realism-saturated literary landscape, embracing fairy tales is, indeed, a good antidote.
Kind of makes me think of flatness of affect - perhaps fairytales are stories on the spectrum.
Ok def sharing this with my students! Also I’m jealous you get a sneak peek at a new Link book!
This is so smart. Fairy tales are such a familiar and accessible example of how a story can break all the rules and still work.
Does anyone have advice on where to publish fairy tales? (Other than Fairy Tale Review, of course!)
Hi Lincoln, A very interesting piece. I edit Facts & Fiction storytelling magazine which concentrates on oral storytelling, folk/fairy tales etc. We're UK based but have readers all over the world. I'd very much like to include this piece in the next issue (May) if that is OK with you. No money involved of course, we just break even! but I can include your web site details etc. Please let me know asap if you agree to this. Have a browse of my web site and you can contact me through that. https://petecastle.co.uk
Rule number one when writing for a varied audience: Realise that not all of your readers wiil know your jargon and acronyms such as MFA or SFF.