Forum: Author Hangout

Alfred Hitchcock beat you to it.

LOL

I meant in here.

Are there any others that can not resist having characters from another story making a cameo in later ones?

I have had characters from works by ProfessorC show up in my canonical work, and characters from my work have shown up in his work. There are a few others who have included characters from my work as well (and Xalir included me!).

I wrote a 'cutting room floor' (i.e non-canonical outtake) where Warren and Sophia from Dance of a Lifetime make a cameo appearance in AWLL.

I wrote a 'cutting room floor' (i.e non-canonical outtake) where Warren and Sophia from Dance of a Lifetime make a cameo appearance in AWLL.

I seem to recall an unfinished story that starts out with the main character having just finished reading Dance of a Lifetime - which in that universe was a semi biographical novel of Warren and Sophia's lives until they won their gold medal.

AJ,

??? Not sure how you see that as not respecting the reader. He didn't say 'even though I'm the only one…', which would be disrespectful since it would imply the readers wouldn't see it.

I've just read 22. NOT RESPECTING THE READER from SB's link and actually it's saying the opposite - rather than telling the reader that something is four, the author should give them 2+2 and let them work it out for itself. However dropping Easter Eggs into stories isn't even giving the reader 2+2 so they have no chance of working out the relevance for themselves unless they're in on the joke. IMO that's another way of disrespecting the reader.

AJ

I've just read 22. NOT RESPECTING THE READER from SB's link and actually it's saying the opposite - rather than telling the reader that something is four, the author should give them 2+2 and let them work it out for itself. However dropping Easter Eggs into stories isn't even giving the reader 2+2 so they have no chance of working out the relevance for themselves unless they're in on the joke. IMO that's another way of disrespecting the reader.

However, that is also requiring one to know the reader is familiar with all other sources. I make no assumption that when I do so any reader is even familiar with the sources, and never do it in a way where that is required.

Much like the Guardian's of the Galaxy Christmas Special. One can enjoy watching it, and not even be aware of who Mark Hamill is or that he was in it.

And it also should not require the reader know, or that can detract from the story. Like if I had an appearance of a time traveling Daniel Eakins working with a computer named HARLIE. I bet 98% would have no clue what that was referencing, so should not be included as a major element. Even though the author that wrote those stories was constantly including such references in his works. But never in a way that those not familiar with the other words needed to know about them at all.

a computer named HARLIE. I bet 98% would have no clue what that was referencing

I don't believe that's what the author of that article meant. He was talking about showing rather than telling and trusting the reader's reading comprehension to "get it." So if you describe someone's tummy grumbling you trust the reader to know he's hungry rather than telling him he's hungry.

So, you're saying that if you don't give the reader everything that they need to recognize/appreciate/understand all of the parts of the story, no matter how minor, you're disrespecting the readers?

I disagree. Authors/movie makers/artists/etc… have been dropping Easter eggs for a long time. Some artists show up in odd places in some of their paintings, directors make quick cameos in their films and authors have other characters make cameos, have acrostics or have other connections to either their works to others. They're fun little things to find but don't detract if not found.

Authors/movie makers/artists/etc… have been dropping Easter eggs for a long time. Some artists show up in odd places in some of their paintings, directors make quick cameos in their films and authors have other characters make cameos, have acrostics or have other connections to either their works to others. They're fun little things to find but don't detract if not found.

I disagree. If you put Easter Eggs in a story, you are creating a distraction unless they're so obscure that no readers spot them. To create two classes of readers, ones who can spot your Easter Eggs and ones who can't, is disrespecting the ones who can't.

AJ

I disagree. If you put Easter Eggs in a story, you are creating a distraction unless they're so obscure that no readers spot them.

That is the difference between a cameo, and fan service.

If you cast Stan Lee as a bus driver where a character is supposed to be riding a bus, that is just a cameo. But if you make a big deal out of it and his being replaced in the scene no longer makes sense for the story, then it is fan service.

Hell, The Beatles did it all the damned time. Their works were constantly referencing other works of theirs. I have never heard anybody ever claim that was distracting or disrespectful.

If a story is improved by an Easter Egg, the author has serious problems and should take a long, hard look at themselves.

If a story isn't improved by an Easter Egg, then artistically there's no point, except as a gimmick to attract fans.

I'm sure some fans would sit through a movie of grass growing if Stan Lee were to drive past in a bus from time to time. But those fans wouldn't remember the movie as a good one.

AJ

I'll leave it at this.

Some fine artists have disagreed with you over the years. I'll trust their take on the subject since they so obviously know what they're doing. I don't know this personally, but I've read that Stephen King does this with every, single book he writes. If think I'll give precedence to his opinion (and Lewis Carrol's, Poe's, etc…) when it comes to writing.

At the end of the day, everyone here writes the stories they want to write. It's a suitable platform for harmless experimentation.

The authors you mention were good writers. Was it because of their gimmicks or despite it?

AJ

EB was sneaky by just saying he took a charter plane that was covered in funny cartoons.

I saw that, but I did not recognize the link you seem to be referencing.

In the late 90's and for a bit after September 11th 2001, I had duties that frequent resulted in going to BFI (Boeing Field International) in Seattle {the regional airport is SeaTac a couple of miles to the south; BFI is where the Boeing corporation has some of their aircraft fly off to customers, or come in for special services. Also, UPS, Fed-Ex, DHL, and other cargo airlines and charter flights operate from.}

Several UPS and other Charter aircraft had "cartoons" on them for various promotional activities. In particular there was "cartoonish" artwork on the 767 that flew the whale to its new home. There were more than a dozen various aircraft that had "cartoonish" artwork (as opposed to "traditional" "Nose Art" (on war planes) or "Tail Art") I just supposed it was just something EB had seen. It seems to be rare, but since I have seen it on dozens (out of thousands of similar aircraft), I just figured it was a "Hat Tip" to "Plane Watchers" who might have noticed such a rarity...