Sime~Gen(tm) Inc.

Where Sime and Gen Meet, Creativity Happens

Workshop: Flashbacks (Jan. 1997)

- [ From: Jacqueline Lichtenberg * EMC.Ver #3.0 ] --

Workshoppers:

FLASHBACKS

by Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 15:22:54 -0500 From: Jacqueline Lichtenberg

< Subject: WORK: Flashbacks -- [ From: Jacqueline Lichtenberg * EMC.Ver #3.0 ] --

James D. Macdonald whom I invited to help mentor this writing workshop wrote :

The way we did that was by setting chunks in "interludes" between the regular chapters, the interludes chosen for which would best illuminate the bit of the main narrative that had just happened, or was just about to happen, whichever would build reader tension best (we hoped, anyway).

JL here: this exactly parallels my thoughts this morning.

To grasp what Jim is talking about here - hunker down and STUDY what the writers do in FOREVER KNIGHT and HIGHLANDER with those flashbacks.

The "tension" doesn't SLACKEN through the flashback - it increases. That's called RISING ACTION, and it works as well in narrative as on the stage. It's something editors look for in a manuscript. And it's the test of whether a flashback is the right tool (i.e. "really needed") or the wrong tool for this purpose.

Now the one thing that all necessary flashbacks have in common - that is missing in the unnecessary ones - is THEMATIC COHESION with the main time- line development.

For example, in FOREVER KNIGHT - we flashback for a little vignette about - oh - acupuncture. And we've just seen Nick probing into an acupuncturist's shop following a trail of blood. It's obvious that something about the place spooks him. FLASHBACK - and we see what spooks him. We see bits of this vignette sprinkled through the present-time narrative and it's always related to the current story. In this episode, for example, the flashback sequence is related to Nick's determination not to kill, and his sense of helplessness and impotence in the face of this ghastly addiction. The flashback sequence shows us a little boy who sees a kill, watches HELPLESSLY while his mother is killed by a vampire - and grows up to be this old man who is an acupuncturist with a heart bent on revenge. The old man recognizes Nick but Nick doesn't know it as he's flashing back to his sense of helplessness.

The key to the episode is the theme of helplessness - and how helplessness distorts perception of truth. Meanwhile, the woman who got shot is likewise a HELPLESS VICTIM - the theme of helplessness and all its ramifications is discussed in exhaustive detail from every direction - and that couldn't happen without the flashback being told in REALTIME as a flashback - simply relating to Nat "this happened and that happened" would not give us the little boy's HELPLESSNESS - nor the mother's HELPLESS VICTIM - not Nick's personal helplessness as he was paralyzed - nor his desperate helplessness in the face of the urge to kill for blood. And the CLIMAX is how BECAUSE OF Nick's experience of helplessness and the lessons he learned from it, he has total compassion for helpless people - the scene where he murmurs to Nat that he'll "get in touch" is a gem and wouldn't have much impact without that HELPLESSNESS theme. Nick understands the elder-little-boy's need for revenge because of his compassion. And because the acupuncturist has seen Nick's compassion - he stays his hand and finally accepts proof that it wasn't Nick who killed his mother.

This is an important episode and it's much more complex than that in the way it links to other episodes and carries the story of Nick's battle against his need for blood and his battle against LeCroix's dominance (against which he's helpless) forward by that step back in time. And we hang on every word , every glance, every nuance, if we've been absorbed into Nick's inner struggle against his PLIGHT - but for those viewers who aren't caught up in Nick's inner battle that flashback is dry, dead and meaningless. (unless you're grooving to LeCroix's triumphs over Nick! Killing that boy's mother was one of LeCroix's greater moments.)

Whether the STORY IS CARRIED FORWARD and tension increased by a flashback depends on WHICH STORY THE READER IS FOLLOWING.

It's the writer's job to 'HOOK ' the reader into the story-line the writer wants them to follow - and that's done with the stylistic link between CONFLICT and SUPSENSE.

Live Long and Prosper,

Jacqueline Lichtenberg