/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13297648]

Chekov's Gun is a retarded concept

[Anonymous No.13297651]

>>13297648
And yet Chekhov wrote pure patrician lit

What have you written?

[Anonymous No.13297654]

>>13297648
Fuck off, lackwit!

[Anonymous No.13297661]

>>13297648
>>13297651
>>13297654
it's just part of chekhov's ideas about writing, other great authors have other ideas, and he never shilled it so hard as cat lady english teachers do

[Anonymous No.13297662]

>>13297648
yeah, a gun on the wall can be used to show that the owner of the house keeps guns on the wall

[Anonymous No.13297718]

>>13297662
It’s a good rule of thumb for not writing unnecessary detail. Also, as every trope, can be played with and deconstructed in many ways. Even if it doesn’t materially shoot, it can be used e. g. as a symbol, object correlative or a red herring. Every trope is a retarded concept if you don’t develop it

[Anonymous No.13297742]

>>13297648
See >>13297662, but really the point is that major narrative elements should have a payoff. Maybe the gun on the wall isn’t a major point, maybe it’s just decoration, but if it becomes a major aside in the scene in question then there better be some thematic reason for that in the same scene or a narrative reason revealed later. The basic dialectic of storytelling is tension and release.

[Anonymous No.13297791]

>>13297648
I liked how it was subverted in 1Q84, though looking back the outcome was kind of obvious.

[Anonymous No.13298243]

>>13297718
>>13297742
Chekhov wrote plays and short stories, where economy of language is crucial.
It's not a very good rule for novelists.

[Anonymous No.13298293]

>>13297648
can you elaborate on that

[Anonymous No.13298341]

>>13298243
Why not? If a detail is not meaningful at all, it’s just filler. You cut it and maybe get a good short story instead of a shitty novel

[Anonymous No.13298386]

>>13297654
Lackwit will never catch on because it’s a stupid word.

[Anonymous No.13298448]

>>13297648
Chekhov is a pseud