Skip to main content

Willing Suspension of Disbelief



Willing suspension of disbelief is a phrase that refers to what we all do as readers. For example: we know there are no such things as werewolves, but we are willing to go with it in a story. That being said, that willingness to suspend our disbelief can be stretched to the breaking point. I have read novels (I won’t mention any names) that were so over the top as to be unbelievable. At that point I either must decide if I can enjoy it as camp or simply not worth my time.

Back when I was in college in my first phase of attempting to be a writer of science fiction, I was given some good advice. I was told that you were allowed one “wonder”: one thing that wows the reader even though it may not be quite scientifically plausible. Wrapped around that wonder though, everything has to make sense. Things need to be consistent as they relate to the wonder. For example, you could have time travel in a story. It is pretty much universally accepted in the real scientific community that time travel (at least traveling back in time) will forever be impossible. That doesn’t mean you can’t use it in a story. People are willing to suspend their disbelief in time travel as long as the story is good and all the other elements of the story are eminently believable. If you start throwing in multiple impossible things, readers will start to walk away.

This concept may be a bit looser in a fantasy novel, but even so, there are always consistent rules that apply to the world in question. For example, Gandalf may be able to do some magic, but he cannot fly. Not only does this follow the rule, but it makes the story better. If the good guy can do anything, then there is not much at stake when he is fighting the bad guy.

One could only wish that Hollywood would follow this rule, but more often than not, movies seem to follow a rule that says the more wonders, the better. Some of the impossible things that happen in movies are just because the movie makers don’t understand science (speedometers in space?) This even holds true for many movies that were made from good science fiction novels, because Hollywood just can’t resist tinkering. Of course I am not saying all science fiction movies do this, but many do.

In my own writing I have tried to follow the “one wonder” rule. Some of my stories don’t even have the one. As for my early stories that violated this rule, yeah, they weren’t very good. But then, many of my early stories weren’t very good anyway because I did not really know what I was doing. If you are a writer you should always try to gauge how far you can take your readers before you step over the line.

(My novel Star Liner, is now available as an ebook through Copypastapublishing.com, or the other usual online sources. For those who like to turn physical pages, the paperback will be out soon).
zon.com/dp/B07DPW7GFW

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Child of the . . .

  What was it like to grow up as a child in the 90s? How about the 1940’s? Thinking about a child growing up in each different decade, conjures up images in my mind. But that is all they are: images. I was a child in the 1960’s. I can tell you what it felt like to be growing up in the 60’s and 70’s, but what it felt like to me is not what the history books remember. History will tell you the 60’s was about the Viet Nam War, civil rights, and the space race. The 70’s was Disco and Watergate. I remember being aware of all of those things, but to me this era was about finding time to play with my friends, something I probably share with a child of any decade. It was about navigating the social intricacies of school.   It was about the Beatles, Three Dog Night, The Moody Blues, The Animals, Jefferson Airplane. It was Bullwinkle, the Wonderful World of Color, and Ed Sullivan. There are things that a kid pays attention to that the grown-ups don’t. Then there are things the adults ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Bureaucrats

  I am one of those nameless, faceless bureaucrats. Yes, that is my job. Though I actually have a name; I even am rumored to have a face. Bureau is the French word for desk, so you could say bureaucrats are “desk people.” In short, I work for the government. I sometimes have to deliver unpleasant news to a taxpayer. I sometimes have to tell them that the deed they recorded won’t work and they will have to record another one with corrections. Or we can’t process their deed until they pay their taxes. I can understand why some of these things upset people. The thing is, we don’t decide these things. It is not the bureaucrats that make the laws. The legislature writes the laws. We are required to follow the law.   If you are going to get mad at someone, get mad at the legislature. Or maybe get mad at the voters who voted the legislature in (That’s you, by the way). The same thing happens when the voters vote in a new district, or vote for a bond, or a new operating levy for an ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Telephonicus domesticus

Alexander Graham Bell’s telephone from 1877 bears about as much similarity to the modern smart phone as an abacus bears to a PC or Mac. There are just about as many leaps in technology in both cases. It’s funny how a major jump in technology happens (like the actual invention of the phone). Then there are some refinements over a few years or decades until it gets to a useful stable form. Then it stays virtually the same for many years with only minor innovations. The telephone was virtually unchanged from sometime before I was born until I was about forty. Push-buttons were replacing the rotary dial, but that was about it. (Isn’t it interesting though that when we call someone, we still call it “dialing?” I have never seen a dial on a cell phone.) Cell phones were introduced and (once they became cheap enough) they changed the way we phone each other. New advancements followed soon after, texting and then smart phones. Personal computers were also becoming commonplace and wer...
Post a Comment
Read more