Not really the key point, but personally as a reader I have always disliked Chekhov's Gun. I like to believe in the world that is being described to me, as if it were real. In the real world, things just exist, they don't necessarily have purpose. So a gun can be described just because it's there, it's interesting, it catches the protagonist's eye, etc.
If I know the author follows Chekhov's Gun, then now I know something is going to happen with the gun, taking away surprise and suspense and possibility, and making the world feel much less real.
sonicrocketman•2h ago
Thanks for reading the source post!
This is a valid concern, I think. However I'd point out that extraneous detail and world building are not the same. If information serves the purpose of explaining the world then by definition it isn't extraneous. Though adding information certainly reaches a point of diminishing returns at some point.
I think the point of Chekhov's gun is more that unless you can justify the inclusion of the info, then it is extraneous and extraneous info should be removed.
stevage•2h ago
If I know the author follows Chekhov's Gun, then now I know something is going to happen with the gun, taking away surprise and suspense and possibility, and making the world feel much less real.
sonicrocketman•2h ago
This is a valid concern, I think. However I'd point out that extraneous detail and world building are not the same. If information serves the purpose of explaining the world then by definition it isn't extraneous. Though adding information certainly reaches a point of diminishing returns at some point.
I think the point of Chekhov's gun is more that unless you can justify the inclusion of the info, then it is extraneous and extraneous info should be removed.
stevage•49m ago