Page 1 of 2

1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 8:54 am UTC
by Mambrino
Image

title: '... hosts were unexpectedly fired from ABC's 'The View' today. ABC will likely announce new ...'

To continue with the theme, with the help of BBC:

"Suarez handed four-month ban for bite"
"World Cup 2014: Russia goalkeeper targeted by laser"

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:14 am UTC
by rhomboidal
I'd be both thrilled and terrified to hear the headline: "Shark populations testing nuclear explosions off East coast."

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:18 am UTC
by Eternal Density
This is the opening to Sharknado 2: The Second One, right?

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:29 am UTC
by Red Hal
"... scientists say that the solar flare is unusual because of its intensity at an otherwise quiet period in the sun's cycle, but stress that it's unlikely to reach the earth ..."

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:30 am UTC
by Djehutynakht
I like to think that when the time comes the East Coast will use the mastery of our shark population to take on North Korea... using SpaceX's rocketry, of course.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 10:38 am UTC
by KeithM
Djehutynakht wrote:I like to think that when the time comes the East Coast will use the mastery of our shark population to take on North Korea... using SpaceX's rocketry, of course.


Why use rockets when you can use helium balloons?

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:14 am UTC
by cellocgw
KeithM wrote:
Djehutynakht wrote:I like to think that when the time comes the East Coast will use the mastery of our shark population to take on North Korea... using SpaceX's rocketry, of course.


Why use rockets when you can use helium balloons?

Why use balloons when you can use trained pigeons?
....
It's "Why use... when you can use..." all the way down :twisted:

I've been paying absolutely no attention: just what is it about whatever movie that has North Korea all whiney (this time)?

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:22 am UTC
by Thorbard9
I've been paying absolutely no attention: just what is it about whatever movie that has North Korea all whiney (this time)?

I would guess that North Korea aren't too happy about a comedy about journalists assassinating their dear leader.

On the other hand, maybe they just disagree with the casting?

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:27 am UTC
by Brian-M
Back To The Future takes this one step further. Not only is there a TV in Doc's house with a news report talking about stolen uranium (or was it plutonium?), but you also get to see a metal box with a radiation symbol on it that Marty doesn't notice.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 12:11 pm UTC
by AverageWriter
"Why use rockets when you can use helium balloons?"


Why did you think a big balloon would stop people?

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 12:17 pm UTC
by orthogon
The top story on the radio news this morning was about the near-certain appointment of Juncker as President of the European Commission. Unlike the sharks, North Korea etc., this story is almost certain to affect my life significantly, and yet I have no idea how.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 12:23 pm UTC
by Whizbang
"... A little boy rescued a litter of kittens from a drain pipe in the capital building..."

DUN, DUN, DUUUUNNNN!

"... Are you getting enough Vitamin D? More at eleven."

DUN, DUN, DUUUUNNNN!

"... Local man finds treasure in his attic! See how much this painting is worth, next.'"

DUN, DUN, DUUUUNNNN!

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 12:28 pm UTC
by mathmannix
cellocgw wrote:
KeithM wrote:
Djehutynakht wrote:I like to think that when the time comes the East Coast will use the mastery of our shark population to take on North Korea... using SpaceX's rocketry, of course.


Why use rockets when you can use helium balloons?

Why use balloons when you can use trained pigeons?
....
It's "Why use... when you can use..." all the way down


Why use balloons when you can use trained turtles?
Why use turtles when you can use trained turtles?
Why use turtles when turtles can use trained turtles?
Turtles use turtles when turtles can turtle turtled turtles?
...
Turtle turtle turtle turtle turtle?
...
I am a turtle.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 12:46 pm UTC
by orthogon
This is [DANGER! TVTROPES LINK AHEAD] Chekhov's News, is it not? And yet, we are told that [ANOTHER ONE!] Chekhov's Gun is not the same as foreshadowing, though it doesn't quite explain to my satisfaction what the difference is.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 1:20 pm UTC
by JustDoug
orthogon wrote:This is [DANGER! TVTROPES LINK AHEAD] Chekhov's News, is it not? And yet, we are told that [ANOTHER ONE!] Chekhov's Gun is not the same as foreshadowing, though it doesn't quite explain to my satisfaction what the difference is.


Checkov's Gun differs from outright foreshadowing in that you're simply "shown" the gun as part of the background along with all the rest. The narrative gives it no more import than the fireplace- or whatever - it's carefully hung above along with all the rest of the furninshings and accessories describing the room. All it tells you is that there's a gun in the room so later on there's no cry of deux ex machina when it is used. Foreshadowing would mention it more explicitly, verbally nudging you and pointing it out, albeit subtly if the writing is good, with Alfred Hitchcock exempted. He'd show you the gun, feature it in closeup, show that it was loaded and working, tell you it's going to be used in a while and then still surprise the hell out of you when it was.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 1:23 pm UTC
by Brian-M
orthogon wrote:This is [DANGER! TVTROPES LINK AHEAD] Chekhov's News, is it not? And yet, we are told that [ANOTHER ONE!] Chekhov's Gun is not the same as foreshadowing, though it doesn't quite explain to my satisfaction what the difference is.

Here's a quote from the Chekov's News link...
This does not include news items that are purely Foreshadowing; to be Chekhov's News, the news must appear early on without obvious significance, and the payoff has to appear later in the work.

So if you can tell it's going to be significant to the story straight away, its foreshadowing. If it doesn't appear to have any significance until later in the story, its a Chekhov.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 1:25 pm UTC
by dzamie
Whizbang wrote:"... A little boy rescued a litter of baby velociraptors from a drain pipe in the capital building..."

DUN, DUN, DUUUUNNNN!

I assume you wrote "kittens," but it's nice to know my userscript is still making things better.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 1:30 pm UTC
by Whizbang
dzamie wrote:
Whizbang wrote:"... A little boy rescued a litter of baby velociraptors from a drain pipe in the capital building..."

DUN, DUN, DUUUUNNNN!

I assume you wrote "kittens," but it's nice to know my userscript is still making things better.



Brilliant.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 1:31 pm UTC
by speising
Brian-M wrote:
orthogon wrote:This is [DANGER! TVTROPES LINK AHEAD] Chekhov's News, is it not? And yet, we are told that [ANOTHER ONE!] Chekhov's Gun is not the same as foreshadowing, though it doesn't quite explain to my satisfaction what the difference is.

Here's a quote from the Chekov's News link...
This does not include news items that are purely Foreshadowing; to be Chekhov's News, the news must appear early on without obvious significance, and the payoff has to appear later in the work.

So if you can tell it's going to be significant to the story straight away, its foreshadowing. If it doesn't appear to have any significance until later in the story, its a Chekhov.

the problem with that is that Chekhov's original quote explicitly says that everything has to be significant. if it isn't, it shouldn't be there in the first place.
which is quite restricting, in my opinion. it shouldn't be immediately clear to the reader/viewer that any weapon mentioned will in fact be used later. where's the suspense in that? (except in the mentioned Hitchcock example, where a clever twist manages to still surprise us.)

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 1:51 pm UTC
by Coyoty
When the gun is emphasized and implied sinister right away, that's "lampshading".

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 2:00 pm UTC
by SlyReaper
Can I just say how awesome a rocket-propelled battleshark sounds?

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 2:22 pm UTC
by Steve the Pocket
mathmannix wrote:Why use balloons when you can use trained turtles?
Why use turtles when you can use trained turtles?
Why use turtles when turtles can use trained turtles?
Turtles use turtles when turtles can turtle turtled turtles?
...
Turtle turtle turtle turtle turtle?
...
I am a turtle.

Go home, Dana Carvey. Nobody liked that movie.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 2:48 pm UTC
by cellocgw
Whizbang wrote:
dzamie wrote:
Whizbang wrote:"... A little boy rescued a litter of baby velociraptors from a drain pipe in the capital building..."
!

I assume you wrote "kittens," but it's nice to know my userscript is still making things better.


Brilliant.


Shouldn't that be "Brillant," Ms. Bean?


JustDoug wrote:Checkov's Gun differs from outright foreshadowing in that you're simply "shown" the gun as part of the background along with all the rest.


Not to dredge more horrors from the OTT, but you gotta include taking out Occam with his own razor.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 2:52 pm UTC
by SecondTalon
speising wrote:the problem with that is that Chekhov's original quote explicitly says that everything has to be significant. if it isn't, it shouldn't be there in the first place.

Hm. I need to re-read the quote then, as I always took it to be that anything that was particularly noteworthy or that stuck out needs to be significant. Introducing a character in his home as being a bit of a gun enthusiast and then showing a wall safe full of rifles and handguns is not remarkable - you'd expect the guns.

The Chekhov's Gun in that situation might be simply that the character is a gun enthusiast and is later able to identify the caliber of weapon being fired at the group based on the sound.

Whereas showing a business mogul's home with a single rifle over the fireplace is not unexpected, but it's an extraneous detail that doesn't need to exist... unless someone's shooting the gun later.

You wouldn't expect a stock ticker in the gun enthusiast 's pre-1960 place, though, so having one there means you later reveal the enthusiast's vast fortune through stock trades, or that the enthusiast is a majority shareholder in the company in question or some other fact that makes the stock ticker make sense. Enthusiasm for outdated technology, maybe.

That's what I always thought, at least - not deliberate foreshadowing, but something that makes more sense upon reflection.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 3:28 pm UTC
by Coyoty
Kittens and velociraptors are often indistinguishable.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 3:44 pm UTC
by cellocgw
Coyoty wrote:Kittens and velociraptors are often indistinguishable.


If that's true, they're the largest bosons in existence!

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 6:20 pm UTC
by Klear
Re: Chekhov's Whatever - you do realize those things are a kind of foreshadowing, right?

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 6:45 pm UTC
by orthogon
Klear wrote:Re: Chekhov's Whatever - you do realize those things are a kind of foreshadowing, right?

It seems that way to me, but tvtropes insists there's a difference and one isn't a subtrope of the other. My problem is: if it happens near the start, then it can only be a Chekhov, since the audience doesn't yet have any context in which to identify a foreshadowing. But if it happens far enough in for the audience to have a chance of identifying it, then it's surely just a normal plot development. And if they can't identify it, it's back to being a late Chekhov. I'm confused.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
by speising
orthogon wrote:
Klear wrote:Re: Chekhov's Whatever - you do realize those things are a kind of foreshadowing, right?

It seems that way to me, but tvtropes insists there's a difference and one isn't a subtrope of the other. My problem is: if it happens near the start, then it can only be a Chekhov, since the audience doesn't yet have any context in which to identify a foreshadowing. But if it happens far enough in for the audience to have a chance of identifying it, then it's surely just a normal plot development. And if they can't identify it, it's back to being a late Chekhov. I'm confused.

it's chekhovs gun if it hangs on the wall and the camera pans across.
it's foreshadowing if the soundtrack goes "dum dum dummm"

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:06 pm UTC
by Klear
orthogon wrote:
Klear wrote:Re: Chekhov's Whatever - you do realize those things are a kind of foreshadowing, right?

It seems that way to me, but tvtropes insists there's a difference and one isn't a subtrope of the other. My problem is: if it happens near the start, then it can only be a Chekhov, since the audience doesn't yet have any context in which to identify a foreshadowing. But if it happens far enough in for the audience to have a chance of identifying it, then it's surely just a normal plot development. And if they can't identify it, it's back to being a late Chekhov. I'm confused.


The "Chekhov's Gun" article says only that they are not synonymous, "Foreshadowing" article says "Chekhov's Gun is often used as a foreshadowing tool." There might be some inconsistencies elsewhere though.

BTW, this TVTropes page is hilarious:
Chekov's Gun

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:47 pm UTC
by da Doctah
Brian-M wrote:Back To The Future takes this one step further. Not only is there a TV in Doc's house with a news report talking about stolen uranium (or was it plutonium?), but you also get to see a metal box with a radiation symbol on it that Marty doesn't notice.


And that TV reporter, the first person seen or heard in the entire BTTF trilogy, reappears thirty years later to sell Marty the Sports Almanac!

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:01 pm UTC
by StClair
Klear wrote:
orthogon wrote:
Klear wrote:Re: Chekhov's Whatever - you do realize those things are a kind of foreshadowing, right?

It seems that way to me, but tvtropes insists there's a difference and one isn't a subtrope of the other. My problem is: if it happens near the start, then it can only be a Chekhov, since the audience doesn't yet have any context in which to identify a foreshadowing. But if it happens far enough in for the audience to have a chance of identifying it, then it's surely just a normal plot development. And if they can't identify it, it's back to being a late Chekhov. I'm confused.


The "Chekhov's Gun" article says only that they are not synonymous, "Foreshadowing" article says "Chekhov's Gun is often used as a foreshadowing tool." There might be some inconsistencies elsewhere though.


TV Tropes is, first and foremost, a wiki. That means that it was crafted by many hands, some of whom may (nay, will) disagree. Especially considering how much of the content, and how it is labeled and sub-divided, is ultimately subjective and/or arbitrary.
As with any wiki, it should be considered a guide, not an authority.

BTW, this TVTropes page is hilarious:
Chekov's Gun


This is true.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:14 pm UTC
by Klear
StClair wrote:TV Tropes is, first and foremost, a wiki. That means that it was crafted by many hands, some of whom may (nay, will) disagree. Especially considering how much of the content, and how it is labeled and sub-divided, is ultimately subjective and/or arbitrary.
As with any wiki, it should be considered a guide, not an authority.


Agreed. When I first mentioned that Chekhov's Gun is a kind of foreshadowing, I was speaking for myself, not TVTropes (though I'm definitely very much influenced by the website). I haven't seen anything on the site that would disagree with me on that one though, so that's a plus.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:45 pm UTC
by rhhardin
"A rifle over the mantel in act I goes off in act III."

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:32 am UTC
by rmsgrey
Chekhov's gun could be rephrased as "anything that looks like it's going to be significant should be" which is kinda the reverse of foreshadowing, where something that is going to be significant is shown to be in advance (even if the way it's significant isn't made clear).

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:46 am UTC
by Pfhorrest
I wouldn't say the reverse, but more a corollary.

Foreshadowing is the technique of showing in advance some detail that's going to be significant.

Chekhov's adage about guns says essentially not to falsely foreshadow; don't show some detail early on that turns out not to be significant. Rather, it tells us that any detail shown in advance is going to turn out to be significant, with the implication that that's pattern of normal or good writing, and that doing otherwise would be bad writing or at least abnormal.

A Chekhov's Gun is the detail which is shown in advance, to become significant later.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:05 am UTC
by Biliboy
Every time... every time I see the tvtropes warning and click anyway...

Two hours later...

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:27 am UTC
by StClair
also, on the strip itself:

Yes. That's just what I need. Something to make reading/watching the news an even more anxiety-inducing experience.
Fantastic.

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 12:20 pm UTC
by Various Varieties
You can also pretend that you're flicking through the news channels Shaun of the Dead style, only seeing a bit of each headline, so that you get:

"North Korea threatens... East Coast... [with] new rocket launch today..."

"Movie shark populations attempt new rocket launch today"

"Upcoming movie shark launch today..."

Re: 1387: "Clumsy Foreshadowing"

Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:50 am UTC
by Neil_Boekend
Pfhorrest wrote:I wouldn't say the reverse, but more a corollary.

Foreshadowing is the technique of showing in advance some detail that's going to be significant.

Chekhov's adage about guns says essentially not to falsely foreshadow; don't show some detail early on that turns out not to be significant. Rather, it tells us that any detail shown in advance is going to turn out to be significant, with the implication that that's pattern of normal or good writing, and that doing otherwise would be bad writing or at least abnormal.

A Chekhov's Gun is the detail which is shown in advance, to become significant later.


Chekhov's guns are not as clear in movies as they are in books. If the writer takes time to describe a paperweight on the desk then it is probably a checkhov's gun. If paperweight stands on a desk in a movie then it can either be just to fill in the blank spot OR it can be a Chekhov's gun.