• Danquebec@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    What if I only want the audience to worry about the baddie having a loaded gun?

    What if a policeman or a solider arrives on scene where there’s a violent opponent? To maintain verisimilitude, they should have a loaded gun.

    I don’t think this principle should always apply.

    • Coelacanth@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s a broad generalisation, and you also have to remember Chekhov was a playwright. It makes a lot more sense if you think about the framework of a stage play. If there is a gun prop on the set, Chekhov’s Gun states that it should be used in the play in some manner.

      In general, it is a different way of stating the adage “Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.” ^(Antoine de Saint-Exupéry)^ It’s a narrative principle of succinctness: every element of the narrative should be essential to the whole.

      Also, the whole thing came from letters Chekhov wrote giving advice to young playwrights. It was never meant to be an unbreakable rule governing all of narrative fiction.

    • dantheclamman@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      That is indeed sometimes the case. Sometimes an object has another purpose. But when I’m watching a cheesy crime movie, if the cinematographer makes a point of showing a close up shot of a weapon, it’s a safe bet that the object is somehow going to figure in the plot. I notice with higher quality mysteries like Knives Out there are a lot of red herrings, not in the typical sense of intentionally misleading us, but trying to show how any crime solving process has dead ends on the pathway to the answer.