Here’s a link to an excellent reminder from literary agent Steve
Laube about the use of cultural references in writing. In this post, he warns writers against assuming their
readers will understand any cultural reference they care to use, particularly younger readers.
Besides, the world changes fast. Yesterday’s news is just that—so yesterday. Whatever was before the general population one year ago, let alone a decade ago, can quickly fade from memory, never to be returned without a lot of memory jogging, if then. Or maybe you and all your same-age friends will instantly remember "that thing that happened with that person that time" and "get it," but not every segment of American reader necessarily will.
As a reader and an editor, I have noticed writers, even novelists, apparently fail to take this into account. I can raise the question with an editing client, but I can't so much when I am a reader.
I recently read a new book by an author (maybe in the mid-forties age range) who described a character as looking like Gene Shalit, with no further explanation. Now, Gene is a ninety-year-old film critic who retired from the Today Show on NBC almost six years ago after being on the show for forty-one years. Focusing on most millennials who could be interested in this book, I have to believe they are going to be stopped cold, wondering who in the world Gene Shalit is. But so might anyone who has never watched the Today Show, or has viewed it only in the last five years.
The story, then, is not only interrupted, but the reader without a reference point still doesn’t know what that character looks like.
The solution is simple: unless you know the majority of your audience will recognize your reference, or is fascinated enough to look it up (have you ever talked to a Gilmore Girls reruns enthusiast?), beware of its use.
This is not to say cultural references should never be used, but they should probably be either in some way explained if too many readers are bound to have no reference point or made a part of the fabric of your book for readers who enjoy the challenge.
In other words, if you very much want your character to look like Gene Shalit, then the man looked like Gene Shalit is probably not as helpful as the man looked like Gene Shalit, a film critic who used to be on TV and was well known for his wild hair, mustache, and bow ties and suspenders. (No, I did not say this example is good writing!)
Here is a video of Gene Shalit to view if you have no idea who he is and what he looks like.
By the way, this works both ways, age-wise. An author I was editing, who is younger than me, referred to someone looking like an "emo girl." I had to look it up. My children are grown and my grandchildren are all under ten, and apparently my taste in TV shows and film doesn't support knowledge of such a girl. Staying on top of current trends in culture is tricky!
Do you want readers to have to look something up to understand what you're talking about or what a character looks like? Probably not, but the decision is yours, and it's worth your time to beware of the cultural reference.
Let’s have a show of hands. Who knew what Gene Shalit (a reference to the past) looked like without the help of Google or YouTube? Was anybody thrown by my reference to Gilmore Girls (a reference to an insanely popular TV show currently only in reruns)? Did you know what an "emo girl" (a reference to a current trend) is without looking it up (try here: urbandictionary.com)?
Besides, the world changes fast. Yesterday’s news is just that—so yesterday. Whatever was before the general population one year ago, let alone a decade ago, can quickly fade from memory, never to be returned without a lot of memory jogging, if then. Or maybe you and all your same-age friends will instantly remember "that thing that happened with that person that time" and "get it," but not every segment of American reader necessarily will.
As a reader and an editor, I have noticed writers, even novelists, apparently fail to take this into account. I can raise the question with an editing client, but I can't so much when I am a reader.
I recently read a new book by an author (maybe in the mid-forties age range) who described a character as looking like Gene Shalit, with no further explanation. Now, Gene is a ninety-year-old film critic who retired from the Today Show on NBC almost six years ago after being on the show for forty-one years. Focusing on most millennials who could be interested in this book, I have to believe they are going to be stopped cold, wondering who in the world Gene Shalit is. But so might anyone who has never watched the Today Show, or has viewed it only in the last five years.
The story, then, is not only interrupted, but the reader without a reference point still doesn’t know what that character looks like.
The solution is simple: unless you know the majority of your audience will recognize your reference, or is fascinated enough to look it up (have you ever talked to a Gilmore Girls reruns enthusiast?), beware of its use.
This is not to say cultural references should never be used, but they should probably be either in some way explained if too many readers are bound to have no reference point or made a part of the fabric of your book for readers who enjoy the challenge.
In other words, if you very much want your character to look like Gene Shalit, then the man looked like Gene Shalit is probably not as helpful as the man looked like Gene Shalit, a film critic who used to be on TV and was well known for his wild hair, mustache, and bow ties and suspenders. (No, I did not say this example is good writing!)
Here is a video of Gene Shalit to view if you have no idea who he is and what he looks like.
By the way, this works both ways, age-wise. An author I was editing, who is younger than me, referred to someone looking like an "emo girl." I had to look it up. My children are grown and my grandchildren are all under ten, and apparently my taste in TV shows and film doesn't support knowledge of such a girl. Staying on top of current trends in culture is tricky!
Do you want readers to have to look something up to understand what you're talking about or what a character looks like? Probably not, but the decision is yours, and it's worth your time to beware of the cultural reference.
Let’s have a show of hands. Who knew what Gene Shalit (a reference to the past) looked like without the help of Google or YouTube? Was anybody thrown by my reference to Gilmore Girls (a reference to an insanely popular TV show currently only in reruns)? Did you know what an "emo girl" (a reference to a current trend) is without looking it up (try here: urbandictionary.com)?
Jean Kavich Bloom is a freelance editor and writer (Bloom in Words Editorial Services). Her personal blog is Bloom in Words too, where she sometimes posts articles about the writing life. She is also one of many contributors to a new blog for women, The Glorious Table. Her published books are Bible Promises for God's Precious Princess and Bible Promises for God's Treasured Boy. She and her husband, Cal, have three children and five grandchildren.
photo credit: http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=158295&picture=question-man
Yes to Gene and Gilmore Girls...no to emo girl! I must admit that my frame of reference hovers in the 60s/70s/80s...sometimes I feel very lost in the GenX world!
ReplyDeleteWell said, Jean, from a woman yearning for the Bob Newhart/MTM days!
Yes to Gene and Gilmore Girls...no to emo girl! I must admit that my frame of reference hovers in the 60s/70s/80s...sometimes I feel very lost in the GenX world!
ReplyDeleteWell said, Jean, from a woman yearning for the Bob Newhart/MTM days!
Thank you, Joyce.
ReplyDelete