Craft Notes
The Spoiler
Recently, Alice Hoffman had a bit of a blow-up over a bad review that gave away too many plot points. (Also, the review was not altogether positive.) So, she argues something like this:
“Critics, don’t spoil my plots. I control the release of information, and am careful about how things unfold.”
After I read Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro, I read some of the critical reviews and author spotlights that came out with the book and they almost all gave away a significant piece of information about it—a piece of information that Ishiguro does not himself mention (though it is hinted at, of course) until page 80. At an author event, I asked Ishiguro about it, and his shrugged it off. He didn’t care. He argued something like this:
“The ‘mystery’ in the plot is not important, but instead the mystery of the characters is. The book is not about the idea that drives the plot, but the way the characters live in the world I have created for them.”
Is someone right here? I really don’t know. Is Hoffman suggesting that the pleasure of reading her book is primarily in following the plot? And that if we know what happens, we’ll be disinclined to read it? If Ishiguro doesn’t care about what the critics revealed about his book, why did he wait for 80 pages to reveal it himself? The revelation was, in my reading experience, a very powerful one. Is he wrong to be fine with a critic depriving a reader of that powerful experience?
Are these two unrelated situations that I am throwing together?
I deliberately stay away from reviews, backs of books, movie trailers, commercials, promotional websites, Wikipedia articles, etc, of any book I am reading or film I intend to see, and I get moderately peeved if one of my friends tells me something (no matter how small) regarding the characters or plot.
For me, it is important that my first experience with a book or film be as uninfluenced as possible. I don’t want a piece of information about a character or plot point changing my understanding of what is happening. I’d rather that happen the second time I read, or the third time.
If I do find something out I’m always disappointed and my perception of the book/film is certainly different and not what I would prefer, but it still has a similar flavour, I think. To me it is just preference. I don’t think there is necessarily a “right” or “wrong”.
I deliberately stay away from reviews, backs of books, movie trailers, commercials, promotional websites, Wikipedia articles, etc, of any book I am reading or film I intend to see, and I get moderately peeved if one of my friends tells me something (no matter how small) regarding the characters or plot.
For me, it is important that my first experience with a book or film be as uninfluenced as possible. I don’t want a piece of information about a character or plot point changing my understanding of what is happening. I’d rather that happen the second time I read, or the third time.
If I do find something out I’m always disappointed and my perception of the book/film is certainly different and not what I would prefer, but it still has a similar flavour, I think. To me it is just preference. I don’t think there is necessarily a “right” or “wrong”.
Plot is unimportant. Hitchcock once said that worrying about the plot of the film he was making was a bit like a painter worrying of the apples he painted were sweet.
That being said, reviewers should warn the audience if they are going to give away relevant plot points, so that those who worry about such things will know to avoid the review.
Plot is unimportant. Hitchcock once said that worrying about the plot of the film he was making was a bit like a painter worrying of the apples he painted were sweet.
That being said, reviewers should warn the audience if they are going to give away relevant plot points, so that those who worry about such things will know to avoid the review.
Hey Matthew, I posted a snippet about this, not sure if you saw it –
http://htmlgiant.com/?p=11568#comments
I think she just brought up the spoiler thing as a desperate attempt to in some way justify her truly out of line behavior.
That said, I’m like Mr. Amato- I really try and not read anything about book/movie/tennis match beforehand…
Plot is unimportant but Ishiguro is an exception (I’m sure there are others) since his novels are almost constructed as mysteries, I wouldn’t read an Agatha Christie novel if I knew the end. I’m really glad I didn’t know what was going to happen in NEVER LET ME GO.
Movie trailers are more ridiculous than reviews, they don’t just give away the “plot,” they give away all the dialogue, good lines and bad, the soundtrack, the end, the denouement, etc.
Plot is unimportant but Ishiguro is an exception (I’m sure there are others) since his novels are almost constructed as mysteries, I wouldn’t read an Agatha Christie novel if I knew the end. I’m really glad I didn’t know what was going to happen in NEVER LET ME GO.
Movie trailers are more ridiculous than reviews, they don’t just give away the “plot,” they give away all the dialogue, good lines and bad, the soundtrack, the end, the denouement, etc.
Plot is for squares.
I would have liked Never Let Me Go a lot more if its narrator HAD given up the plot’s mysteries from the beginning, instead of withholding them. Instead, I felt like I was supposed to keep reading for plot, when I’d much rather have read for the rest.
I would have liked Never Let Me Go a lot more if its narrator HAD given up the plot’s mysteries from the beginning, instead of withholding them. Instead, I felt like I was supposed to keep reading for plot, when I’d much rather have read for the rest.
I feel like giving away the plot of something is a good test of whether it’s good. If you know the plot of something, and read/watch it, and are still interested/engaged/whatever, then it’s successful, probably. I think more books should give away their plots upfront, then raise the bar and try to be interesting in a non-Sixth-Sense way.
I feel like giving away the plot of something is a good test of whether it’s good. If you know the plot of something, and read/watch it, and are still interested/engaged/whatever, then it’s successful, probably. I think more books should give away their plots upfront, then raise the bar and try to be interesting in a non-Sixth-Sense way.
I agree with you on this. Being relieved of figuring out the plot does help you figure out if whatever you are consuming is decent or not. I’m just a sucker for plot, I guess. Although, a whole lot of what I read and watch doesn’t really have that much of a plot anyway, so I guess it doesn’t really matter. I just don’t want someone else’s opinion interfering with my evaluation of the work.
I agree with you on this. Being relieved of figuring out the plot does help you figure out if whatever you are consuming is decent or not. I’m just a sucker for plot, I guess. Although, a whole lot of what I read and watch doesn’t really have that much of a plot anyway, so I guess it doesn’t really matter. I just don’t want someone else’s opinion interfering with my evaluation of the work.
We have a cultural bias that dictates things must have repeat value to be good–you have to be able to re-read it and get as much out (or more) of it or it’s not good … why? Why can’t there be things that are best the first time and then you throw them away? Many jokes are best the first time you hear them. Especially if you don’t already know the punchline. Maybe some books/movies are only good if you don’t know the punchline first. Then you throw them away and read something else.
We have a cultural bias that dictates things must have repeat value to be good–you have to be able to re-read it and get as much out (or more) of it or it’s not good … why? Why can’t there be things that are best the first time and then you throw them away? Many jokes are best the first time you hear them. Especially if you don’t already know the punchline. Maybe some books/movies are only good if you don’t know the punchline first. Then you throw them away and read something else.
Just as sort of a side note, I’m often interested by books that are almost nothing BUT plot. Poems too. I’m thinking of Kenneth Koch’s epic “Ko, or A Season on Earth”. Just one thing happening after another…all action.
Just as sort of a side note, I’m often interested by books that are almost nothing BUT plot. Poems too. I’m thinking of Kenneth Koch’s epic “Ko, or A Season on Earth”. Just one thing happening after another…all action.
Thank you! This comes up all the time when people trash flarf. Everything is transient. Speaking of Kenneth Koch (in my comment below), Allen Ginsberg once asked him what he thought people would think of his, Koch’s, poems in a hundred years? Koch answered something like: I don’t write them for people a hundred years from now, I write them for people now living.
I think this is part of a reaction to “mindless entertainment” that you don’t have to “put anything into”. I think, and I could very easily be wrong here, that those things are generally considered to be of “one time use”, and since whoever decides what is “good” decided they didn’t like that type of entertainment, the characteristics associated with it (only being consumed once, etc) were deemed “bad” as well.
Thank you! This comes up all the time when people trash flarf. Everything is transient. Speaking of Kenneth Koch (in my comment below), Allen Ginsberg once asked him what he thought people would think of his, Koch’s, poems in a hundred years? Koch answered something like: I don’t write them for people a hundred years from now, I write them for people now living.
I think this is part of a reaction to “mindless entertainment” that you don’t have to “put anything into”. I think, and I could very easily be wrong here, that those things are generally considered to be of “one time use”, and since whoever decides what is “good” decided they didn’t like that type of entertainment, the characteristics associated with it (only being consumed once, etc) were deemed “bad” as well.
yeah, although, for most things that fit into the “mindless entertainment” category, I’m not even interested in them the first time. like a James Bond movie? god.
Flarf is a perfect example, it’s not “built to last” but that doesn’t mean it can’t be good. Ditto Dada.
Writing for future generations is delusional. there’s no such thing as “timeless”
yeah, although, for most things that fit into the “mindless entertainment” category, I’m not even interested in them the first time. like a James Bond movie? god.
Flarf is a perfect example, it’s not “built to last” but that doesn’t mean it can’t be good. Ditto Dada.
Writing for future generations is delusional. there’s no such thing as “timeless”
That’s very true. I’d say I’m probably not interested in them, either.
I guess it’s just an “us against them” thing, or an “intellectual” thing (maybe I shouldn’t be categorising things like this). Some people want to distance themselves from those that would be interested in Bond and the like, so when they find a characteristic of the “mindless” stuff in something that might actually not be mindless at all they still dismiss it. It would be a pretty easy thing to do. I know I’ve done it before in similar situations.
That’s very true. I’d say I’m probably not interested in them, either.
I guess it’s just an “us against them” thing, or an “intellectual” thing (maybe I shouldn’t be categorising things like this). Some people want to distance themselves from those that would be interested in Bond and the like, so when they find a characteristic of the “mindless” stuff in something that might actually not be mindless at all they still dismiss it. It would be a pretty easy thing to do. I know I’ve done it before in similar situations.
I review books for The Rumpus and other pubs, and my take on this very interesting topic you raise is that reviewers should either take care not to spoil the suspense of a book OR make sure that in their review they make a good case for why it’s so important to give away aspects of the plot. Personally, I felt affronted by the reviews of Ishiguro’s —Never Let Me Go—. Most of the time, reading a review doesn’t detract from my experience of reading fiction, but in that case I felt that for no good reason an enjoyable part of my reading pleasure had been snatched from me. I’m now writing a review of _A Gate at the Stairs_ by Lorrie Moore in which I ruthlessly give away the plot, and I hope I succeed in convincing readers that I have a good reason for doing so. To warn the reader of my intention, I mention movie trailers in the first line. If you ask me, the real spoilers–analogous to movie trailers–for literary fiction are the @#$$!! jacket copy. That I NEVER read before reading the book.
I review books for The Rumpus and other pubs, and my take on this very interesting topic you raise is that reviewers should either take care not to spoil the suspense of a book OR make sure that in their review they make a good case for why it’s so important to give away aspects of the plot. Personally, I felt affronted by the reviews of Ishiguro’s —Never Let Me Go—. Most of the time, reading a review doesn’t detract from my experience of reading fiction, but in that case I felt that for no good reason an enjoyable part of my reading pleasure had been snatched from me. I’m now writing a review of _A Gate at the Stairs_ by Lorrie Moore in which I ruthlessly give away the plot, and I hope I succeed in convincing readers that I have a good reason for doing so. To warn the reader of my intention, I mention movie trailers in the first line. If you ask me, the real spoilers–analogous to movie trailers–for literary fiction are the @#$$!! jacket copy. That I NEVER read before reading the book.