on 5/13/03 12:32 PM, Bludis Jack at
buildsnburns@yahoo.com wrote:
<<>>
> long, Joe Pike
> flashbacks distracted from the forward
movement
> of the book, even though they may have
more
> thoroughly explained the character, and did
have
> relationship to the present action.
<<>>
Well, that's the problem with flashbacks as a writing
technique. Flashbacks pretty much always bring the action to
a halt, for a bit, anyway. And a reader always has to make a
little mental adjustment when it comes.
If the writer uses it judiciously, it's a good device to
regulate pacing. After a lot of action scenes, sometimes it's
nice to slow the pace of the story for a bit. This is when
the writer can 'fill in' with some detail(s) that explore or
amplify character or 'back story'.
Personally, I don't like too much introspection in my
mystery/thriller/etc. reading. Okay, sure, some motivation is
important, and many times I find that a central character's
motivation is too weak to support the plot. This is where the
writer has failed to sufficiently build character as the
action moves forward.
The bottom line is that, like many other stylistic mannerisms
of writers, some folks like it, some folks don't. It's why
they make chocolate _and_ vanilla.
Miles Archer
(Who knows what he's supposed to do, but finds doing it
difficult to do well.)
-- # 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 : 13 May 2003 EDT