Today’s discussion on ‘the effect of too much detail’ was very interesting. It’s true that the details help determine the characters in the book (and all books for that matter), for example we know what a character likes, if we read about the details he notices in his daily life. If he notices litter lying around or complains about messiness, we pretty much can deduct that he is a very neat and orderly person.
However, when a book contains a lot of detail about a certain place the effect is different depending on who reads it. As we saw in our class today, since The Garneau Block has a lot of details about places in Edmonton (not always correct as was pointed out in-class), Edmontonians (or others like me, who have been to Edmonton and know some of the places) will establish a much closer emotional connection to the book. Everyone likes to reads books that are situated in the place you feel at home in. I know that I am always delighted when my hometown is mentioned in a book.
That however doesn’t mean that people who don’t know the city cannot enjoy this. Some people have some really great imagination (sadly not me, at least when it comes to places) and they would get a really good sense of what Edmonton is like from the book. Others might think it’s too much information on one place that you didn’t know, but the level of detail you like, is pretty much a matter of what you like personally. If one likes long descriptions of landscapes in books, than one likes details. If you don’t like those, than you probably won’t like all those details in The Garneau Block.
It might also be a matter of frequency. There are not that many books taking place in Edmonton, so it is ‘more’ special if you read one. On the other hands there are tons of books that take place in London, New York…etc. and if you live in those places you might be fed up with reading about your own city. You would prefer to read about another (perhaps more exotic?) place.
All in all, the question of too much detail and how that works for you, is matter of you own personal perspective and preference.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I also haven't finished the book yet, but I actually had the opposite view. I can't completely judge the book yet because I haven't finished it, but I find the extreme detailing to be a little too much. It's fine to mention actual places in Edmonton but I am noticing I find it a little over the top. I wish I could remember the exact moment this struck me, but I was thinking about it before I read a few blogs that mentioned the precise details that "The Garneau Block" contains.
ReplyDeleteI guess it just feels a little like "beating a dead horse" to use a total cliche. It was like he imagined that if he continued to throw in these references to Edmonton, then peaple from Edmonton would connect with the book and therefore automatically like it. I think about it in opposition to "A Tourist's Guide to Glengarry" and how fun it was to figure out where those places actually were. Maybe I just like a mystery?
This debate reminds me of my severe dislike of Tolkien's The Two Towers. He described every. single. leaf. in the forest. Not cool to read about, but it probably helped a lot when they were making the movie.
ReplyDelete