This might be my favorite (i.e., most helpful long term) of your posts yet. I think I've already come to the conclusion that the majority of the films I love the most are those where vertical and horizontal storytelling intersect. Offhand, I'm thinking of A River Runs Through It, Amelie, House of Flying Daggers, The Grand Budapest Hotel, Sideways... Interestingly, I could watch all of those films with the sound off, and they would still be entertaining because of those tone poem (horizontal) moments. No one wants to watch Die Hard without audio.
This, Sir, is brilliant. Sometimes, there's just this thing that a writer does, and you don't know what it is, so you can't figure out how it works (or doesn't). Here you define a mode of operation, and in doing so, clarify the "what" so that I can more readily access the "how," and make my "that" better. Thank you.
Another great post that resonates with one by Brandon Taylor, in which he says, "Is this detail actually a detail or is it just information?" This point made me understand why I often skim so much pop fiction: I'm racing through the details that mean nothing to find the information, the details I have to know. Similarly that heuristic makes me appreciate George Saunders class because for him everything should be details, not mere information, however small the detail. One could, I suppose, say that the difference between pop fiction and literary fiction is in the density of the information. Of course the genius of Agatha Christie is that you have to treat everything as detail--and even then something you brushed off as unimportant she will show to have been crucial. And the genius of Lynch's Inland Empire is that he had no script and put the scenes together by feel, but you trust that his selection process made all the information into details even if neither you nor he could explain what they mean.
What I like about your post then is in what makes information into a detail, and how details can, well, stack vertically or horizontally. For instance, the swinging lamp is information the first time we see it (Depp's character could be looking at anything, although it's pendulum swing is a bonus), but it's a detail the second time we see it (he's bored, the trip is long, and he's not smart enough to have brought a book with him). But I have to say I prefer the details of Die Hard better, because they are clearly details immediately especially "make fists with your toes" because it does so much more work and means more things as the movie goes along. Then again, I'm a vertical storyteller as a writer because I don't trust myself to be a horizontal storyteller for fear of being pointless and boring, so I tend to prioritize piling on. I agree that the best thing to do is disguise vertical details as horizontal details. In a way, this is the magic of what makes the movie Barbarians work.
This might be my favorite (i.e., most helpful long term) of your posts yet. I think I've already come to the conclusion that the majority of the films I love the most are those where vertical and horizontal storytelling intersect. Offhand, I'm thinking of A River Runs Through It, Amelie, House of Flying Daggers, The Grand Budapest Hotel, Sideways... Interestingly, I could watch all of those films with the sound off, and they would still be entertaining because of those tone poem (horizontal) moments. No one wants to watch Die Hard without audio.
I like how you explain arthouse films as examples of horizontal storytelling. Nice.
How do your articles always arrive exactly when I need them?
Great post.
One of my favorite scenes of all time is from Madmen, S01 E12.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqkHPsY8p84
It blends both vertical and horizontal in the same way as 'put that coffee down'.
Love this storytelling analysis.
solid share. liked
This, Sir, is brilliant. Sometimes, there's just this thing that a writer does, and you don't know what it is, so you can't figure out how it works (or doesn't). Here you define a mode of operation, and in doing so, clarify the "what" so that I can more readily access the "how," and make my "that" better. Thank you.
Another great post that resonates with one by Brandon Taylor, in which he says, "Is this detail actually a detail or is it just information?" This point made me understand why I often skim so much pop fiction: I'm racing through the details that mean nothing to find the information, the details I have to know. Similarly that heuristic makes me appreciate George Saunders class because for him everything should be details, not mere information, however small the detail. One could, I suppose, say that the difference between pop fiction and literary fiction is in the density of the information. Of course the genius of Agatha Christie is that you have to treat everything as detail--and even then something you brushed off as unimportant she will show to have been crucial. And the genius of Lynch's Inland Empire is that he had no script and put the scenes together by feel, but you trust that his selection process made all the information into details even if neither you nor he could explain what they mean.
What I like about your post then is in what makes information into a detail, and how details can, well, stack vertically or horizontally. For instance, the swinging lamp is information the first time we see it (Depp's character could be looking at anything, although it's pendulum swing is a bonus), but it's a detail the second time we see it (he's bored, the trip is long, and he's not smart enough to have brought a book with him). But I have to say I prefer the details of Die Hard better, because they are clearly details immediately especially "make fists with your toes" because it does so much more work and means more things as the movie goes along. Then again, I'm a vertical storyteller as a writer because I don't trust myself to be a horizontal storyteller for fear of being pointless and boring, so I tend to prioritize piling on. I agree that the best thing to do is disguise vertical details as horizontal details. In a way, this is the magic of what makes the movie Barbarians work.
The Brandon post: https://blgtylr.substack.com/p/against-character-vapor