I alluded to this topic in my last post. In the story being considered, no where are we given any inner thoughts of the characters. Inner thoughts are common in modern literature, and are a frequent topic at critique groups: how many inner thoughts to give; how to format them; how long to make them; how many point of view characters to give the inner thoughts for. Get in the characters' heads, we are told by writing instructors.
The writer of 2nd Kings didn't do that. He merely gives us the characters' action and words. They did this. They said that. They responded thusly. We don't know the motivation of the Shunammite woman as she first asks Elisha for dinner, then asks her husband to build a room for him. We never see her say This is a man of God; we must be kind to him; what can I do? We never see her husband say Why is this woman always wanting to spend my money? Well, he is a man of God. As I mentioned last post, we don't know if he thought She can't possibly get back from Mount Carmel before dark. What's going on between this "man of God" and my wife? Instead, the writing draws us in. It insists we dig deeper, try to figure out what the characters are thinking based on he condensed telling of their actions and words.
That wouldn't work today with a modern readership. Can you see someone with a Tom Clancy novel saying, "Now what is Jack Ryan thinking at this moment?" No, now readers want the full story--shown, not told, with limited points of view. Paper and ink are no loner objects of concern; attention span is. Still, perhaps the writer of 2nd Kings has given me something to think about, something to try to work a little bit into my writing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment