I wrote:
<<therefore, i'd say that something is only a cliche if
its ineffective.>>
Mr. T wrote:
>On the contrary: the majority of the reading public
*loves* cliché³® >Look
>at the best-seller list. The cliché ©s effective, as is
bad >writing in
>general
perhaps poor word choice on my part. I meant "ineffective" in
terms of that subjective quality of artistic success, nothing
to do with commercial success. i suppose it's not totally
subjective though because it would take a knowledgable reader
to be able to judge whether something is a cliche or not.
that is, if you're a kid or an infrequent reader or simply
new to a genre, you might be really impressed by a device
that actually is derivative, overused, etc. to you,
subjectively, it does not seem to be trite or hackneyed but
in the context of a greater knowledge of what else is out
there, it actually is a cliche. this helps to explain the
phenomenon of coming back to a book you enjoyed as a kid, or
when new to a particular genre or subgenre, and discovering
that it wasn't what you remembered. the book hasn't changed,
but the way that you look at it changes. so i suppose that
yes, there is some objective basis for calling something a
cliche, but I still think it's a case-by-case
situation.
i think the two best explanations for the popularity of
cliched writing are
(a) people want something familiar and not challenging or (b)
people don't read enough to recognize when something is a
cliche.
carrie
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
-- # To unsubscribe from the regular list, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # majordomo@icomm.ca. This will not work for the digest version. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 08 May 2002 EDT