Avoiding Cliche

I watched Kingsman on the weekend, and I thought it was a lot of fun. Basically they take every single cliché in the book and ramp them up to the nth degree, and it works. They have the cheesy secret service, the secret weapons room and cheesy weapons, the spy training school, the underprivileged kid proving his talent, seriously, every single cliché out there. Even the Bond-style post-mission lurve hookup. But it works because the movie just owns every single one of those clichés. It doesn't try to pretend it's not using them, it does it in neon glitter paint.
 
I saw the DVD cover of that today in supermarket for first time.
I wondered was a it a Johnny English kind of think.

There was a David Niven and Co, spoof version of Bond Casino Royale years ago
 
Giving people what they expect isn't necessarily a bad thing. Some story writers (eg Cornwell, and King) write stories in a style that readers like and are comfortable with. They might contain cliches, but doesn't make them any less enjoyable to read (or indeed sell as many copies).

Occasionally you get authors who go against the grain and surprise us by having characters who do things we don't expect, or to whom unexpected things occur - and that can be great too.

Star Wars (the movie) is jam-packed with cliches, and is one of the greatest sci-fi movies ever. 2001 on the other hand does entirely unexpected things - and that's also a terrific film.

Most people like cliches, they're comfortable with what they know, they like to second-guess what will happen next and smile smugly when it does; they're also pleasantly surprised when it doesn't.

Basically, cliches - who cares?
 
One problem is that some clichés actually make sense. For example, the "tough space marine" cliché. They would be tough for the same reason that real (waterborne) Marines are tough. Any ship only has so much space, and the same goes double for cargo space for ammo and supplies - so when choosing troops for that duty you're going to use your best.
 
Stephen Palmer said:
But evil machines are the fun-est! I make full use of them...
Click to expand...

There are no evil machines. There are humans who can't properly use them. ;)

Seriously, evil computers is the cliché I hate the most. Being an IT specialist, I can't but see that all cyberpunk clichés are total nonsense. In 1970s, writers who invented them didn't understand even the basics of computer sciences. Unfortunately, such clichés are copied from one book to another. In the modern world, the word "computer" or "artificial intelligence" in most SF texts mean they can be deleted without reading.

The main mistake is, computers can't long for domination over human beings. It's part of human mind, as domination is part of our biological behavioral patterns. It's preprogrammed in our DNA. But computers have no DNA and no built-in instincts that force them to seek an opportunity to become a Big Boss. Really. They don't want to. Don't enforce them to become evil, they dislike it.
 
a cliche is an artifice that gets progressively worse,simply through (over)use.
I don't mind the occasional cliche,even a cliche can be well written/conceived.
the lack of protagonists from Non-Western countries,the assumption that in the 27th century careers,lifestyle,economics,family life,sexual morals,religion,the labour market,government,etc.etc, will be like today is a very bad cliche
 
hardsciencefanagain said:
lack of protagonists from Non-Western countries
Click to expand...
Might be reasonable in a 10th C. story.

Even today incommer ethnic communities in many western countries are inward looking. So in many stories having a single ethnic group is realistic. It's a mistake to have token people from minority groups in your stories simply to satisfy the PC brigade. If you can't write knowledgeably about them and have them as a natural part of the story it's plain daft. Like making Conan Doyle's Watson be a Lesbian Somali Muslim Woman in a TV series or something.
 
hardsciencefanagain said:
a cliche is an artifice that gets progressively worse,simply through (over)use.
I don't mind the occasional cliche,even a cliche can be well written/conceived.
the lack of protagonists from Non-Western countries,the assumption that in the 27th century careers,lifestyle,economics,family life,sexual morals,religion,the labour market,government,etc.etc, will be like today is a very bad cliche
Click to expand...

Wrong. Any book is published for people to read it. And people mostly love reading about themselves (they need a character to associate themselves with). So your characters will look like people for whom you're writing the book, or else no one will care to read it.
 
A lot of what I'm reading here is more Trope than cliche. Cliches start out as things that might seem wise or full of wisdom.
For instance 'Man cannot live by bread alone." Has some wisdom behind it and was considered quite highly as such; but if we over use it and perhaps start diluting by placing it where it might not particularly belong it quickly becomes a cliche.

The trope on the other hand is what seems to show up here the most. It's an entire plot or plot device such as Indiana Jones hating snakes and then we find later his father hates rats. Those are trope type device to set us up for the scene with all the rats and the one with all the snakes.

I think there is a need to make a distinction here before we go off burning cliches in the witch-hunt that is somehow mistaking the two.
 
a phrase or expression that has been used so often that it is no longer original or interesting

: something that is so commonly used in books, stories, etc., that it is no longer effective(merriam Webster)

a trite, stereotyped expression; a sentence or phrase, usually expressing a popular or common thought or idea, that has lost originality, ingenuity, and impact by long overuse
 
Yes, I'd agree with that. So not "wrong".
 
the intrinsic worth of a book is among other things,controlled by
originality(of plot,characterization,style/prose)
Writers are ,in principle ,artists
Make it difficult for your audience,credit them with some intelligence.
Given the population size of India and China,and if you want SOME credibility,your protagonist could well come from those parts
Barry Hughart used chinese protagonists....
extrapolate your economics: given the existence of E.g. Bitcoin,will a protagonist from the 34th
century still have "small change jangling in his pocket"?
 
hardsciencefanagain said:
given the existence of E.g. Bitcoin,will a protagonist from the 34th
century still have "small change jangling in his pocket"?
Click to expand...
Well, IBAN is real electronic money (bitcoin isn't a currency or electronic money, but a speculation vehicle). But many "set in future" stories since maybe 1940s envisaged a cashless society.
Most people here don't use cheques any more, I increasingly pay amounts as low as 1 Euro now electronically, using tag for tolls, plastic cards in shops and parking and online (even for government charges), IBAN, Paypal, Credit Card and Debit card.
Really time USA adopted IBAN. In 1960s to 1990s I was sceptical about a cashless society as per books, but IBAN, PayPal and Debit Card have convinced me. People that won't touch PayPal or a Credit card are happy to use IBAN and debit cards.
 
Though originality of plot would be refreshing I think you are asking too much.

hardsciencefanagain said:
the intrinsic worth of a book is among other things,controlled by
originality(of plot,characterization,style/prose)
Click to expand...

I haven't seen an original plot in a long time. Variations on plots yes but nothing spectacularly, outstandingly recognizable as original. There might be original looking science extrapolations but that is not plot. There might be something plot related to the science but you'd be hard press to say you never saw that plot device before. In fact trying to stretch to a level of something original might lead to being so unrecognizable that the reader fails to see it as a plot and it all falls flat when they decide the book is either plot-less or the plot is so thin it falls away at the first attempt to examine it.

I think the originality is stuck mostly on prose/style and characterization and you have to be careful about prose style changes because I've read stuff that sounds like a poor translation from some other language that might actually be the author's attempt at making his prose different.

I think it's most important that you have a plot and know how to use good characterization and you develop a style that is yours and you do it well so that the reader might read it all from front to back with only the recognition that this was a well written story that kept them up all night because they couldn't put the book down.

And with that in mind I think that you would be free to add a few tropes and cliches without hurting it if you reach that formulation. But I wouldn't advise it because the minute they do recognize those things it's likely to throw off the flow of the prose and give the reader the opportunity to bail and get to bed to get some sleep.

We wouldn't want that; no sleep for the reader until they reach the last page.

It would also be great if they got to the last page and said. "Aw darn I really would like to know more about this character."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
clarissajaneen Avoiding Racism in Fantasy Races Writing Discussion 2
D Cliches, avoiding them, spotting them and so on Writing Discussion 10
therapist Avoiding -ing verbs? Grammar & Spelling 20
S 1981: avoiding death, changed into soldier, time crystal, air bear, p-grav Book Search 0
A avoiding cliches Writing Discussion 16

Similar threads


Back
Top