Here's The Thing About Fiction.

In H.G. Wells's The Time Machine the Time Traveler points out how much more easy it is to describe a foreign landscape in detail when the place is fictional, than if you've really been there. This is something I've got to thinking about ever since I wrote my own dystopian novel.

Sure, I didn't go into a lot of detail about the destruction that was laid to the cities in the course of the war, but that doesn't mean I let my characters describe too much. Because, really, if you've just had a building collapse on you after the bombing of an entire city, would you really take the time to look around and note what happened to the areas you weren't in?

I don't know, maybe. Maybe I'm just being paranoid, because I always critique myself too harshly, but it's still an interesting thought.

As a child, when you're learning how to write a good story, you're taught that you always start by laying the scene. Give your audience a place, a setting. As you grow older, that rule is muddled with cries for reality in fiction. People saying, "How can you point that out in the narrative, if the character didn't know about it yet?" And, slowly, your inner child loses it's love of fiction.

You become more cynical, maybe you become a snob with your fiction. I don't know. But, do you ever look at fiction the same way again?

Now, I'm not saying you should just ignore plot holes, inaccuracies, or bad writing. Of course not. I am a writer. I love words too much to condone bad writing. But, it's just something to think about.

Of course there's suspension of disbelief, but how far do we take it? That's what this is really about. Do you say, "Oh, who cares if they never explained how that person magically gained the power to move through walls at the exact moment they needed it. It's suspension of disbelief." Or, is this only a tool to be used sparingly. Is it only to let us let go of the fact that the key to time travel has yet to be discovered, even though you're using it in your piece?

To me, it's the latter, and, that's probably the case for most people. However, there are those who would disagree. I know, when I'm watching movies with friends or family, I have the tendency to nitpick. I point out plot holes or needless scenes, because it's impossible to turn off my inner editor. Always, the response from my peers is the same, "It's fiction. Who cares?"

I care, apparently. As I said, to me, suspension of disbelief is merely a tool to help set your stage. It's something to use so that you can enjoy stories that are set in alternate time lines, or that involve fantastic ideas. It is not to make up for a lazy writer, a bad actor, or contradicting ideals.

Somewhere in here, I feel like there was a point to writing this. However, I haven't quite gotten to the catharsis part of my thinking process yet. So, I guess this is the end of this ramble.

Thoughts, opinions, comments?

Also, if anyone knows the actual H.G. Well's quote I'm talking about please give it to me. I can't remember exactly how it goes (just the idea expressed), and therefore, I couldn't find it. XD

Love Sheen