: Re: Stories with multiple possible interpretations: do you plan for it? There are many stories out there that are open-ended, up for different interpretations. Many theories spawn around such stories,

@Ogunnowo420

Vote Up Vote Down

I assume the op meant something in the style of the lady and the tiger. While the obvious answer is that art is open to interpretation, I'm willing to guess you know that by the time you get to this answer.

You do not need to plan ambiguity, and at times this can be harmful as the best story telling tends to be highly specific. If you want an ambiguous ending, (inception) then after you write enough of the story you figure out what your question is and go back and make sure that question is central to events and that you've appropriately foreshadowed conflicting, but very possible, endings.

I do not think it's likely that most projects start out this way; though it can happen if you keep the target in mind. I think it is usually an act of revision. The original plan is not as important as recognizing the opportunity and then adjusting appropriately.

The last thing you want to be is vague, though. You want each possibility to be scintillatingly real and feel legitimately possible. Only then can you get your readers to argue with each other vehemently and with passion. Think of it as the reverse mystery. Instead of solving a problem, you're setting one up with multiple answers. There are suspects, red herrings, pieces of evidence, and tensions/ conflicts that play to different sympathies.

If you want to use this sort of device as a subplot or ancillary element, then you will likely need to not just change the scale, but also the importance. This is because if the element is too important it will draw attention and be a point of confusion; thus distracting your readers and harming your work. At that point it will become the plot.

The other way to have "ambiguity" is to write only the essential. If you set a good pace and only give people the important details there will be space they naturally fill with imagination, without complaint. This is not merely readers interpreting differently, it's allowing the mind to do what it does naturally: create shortcuts for a partially observed world that it can use to navigate the world. If you do this well, you can hack the brain into making all sorts of leaps.

Regardless, people will interpret works how they see fit; but it's obvious that a controlled voice can ensnare a readership in a mystery intentionally.

The other option is to write without direction, and pray you have magic fingers. You can do better than that.

(0)

Login to post a comment!