Willing Suspension of Disbelief: Difference between revisions

Everything About Fiction You Never Wanted to Know.
Content added Content deleted
m (Remove useless categories)
No edit summary
 
(18 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Useful Notes|wppage=Suspension of disbelief}}
{{trope}}
[[Samuel Taylor Coleridge]], the poet and author, called drama "that willing suspension of disbelief for the moment, which constitutes poetic faith ..."
[[Samuel Taylor Coleridge]], the poet and author, called drama "that willing suspension of disbelief for the moment, which constitutes poetic faith ..."


Any creative endeavor, certainly any written creative endeavor, is only successful to the extent that the audience offers this willing suspension as they read, listen, or watch.
Any creative endeavor, certainly any written creative endeavor, is only successful to the extent that the audience offers this willing suspension as they read, listen, or watch.


An author's work, in other words, does not ''have'' to be realistic, only believable and internally consistent (see [[Magic A Is Magic A]]). When the author pushes the audience too far, the work fails. As far as science fiction is concerned, viewers are usually willing to go along with [[Techno Babble|creative explanations]] unless the show tries to use real science, at which point it's fair game, though this is because Science Fiction is just that: Science [[Exactly What It Says On the Tin|FICTION]]. Attempting to use actual science to explain something you made up removes the story from it's own fantasy universe and places it in the context of reality. That's why [[Physics Goof|people critize your wormhole travel system]] or [[Applied Phlebotinum|how shrink potion doesn't violate the laws of matter conservation]]. Suspension of disbelief can be broken even in science fiction when a show breaks its own established laws or places said laws outside of fiction.
An author's work, in other words, does not ''have'' to be realistic, only believable and internally consistent (see [[Magic A Is Magic A]]). When the author pushes the audience too far, the work fails. As far as science fiction is concerned, viewers are usually willing to go along with [[Techno Babble|creative explanations]] unless the show tries to use real science, at which point it's fair game, though this is because Science Fiction is just that: Science [[Exactly What It Says on the Tin|FICTION]]. Attempting to use actual science to explain something you made up removes the story from its own fantasy universe and places it in the context of reality. That's why [[Physics Goof|people criticize your wormhole travel system]] or [[Applied Phlebotinum|how shrink potion doesn't violate the laws of matter conservation]]. Suspension of disbelief can be broken even in science fiction when a show breaks its own established laws or places said laws outside of fiction.


A common way of putting this is "You can ask an audience to believe the impossible, but not the improbable." For example, people will accept that [[A Wizard Did It|the Grand Mage can teleport across the world]], or that [[Stealth in Space|the spaceship has technology that makes it completely invisible]] without rendering its own sensors blind, but they won't accept that the ferocious carnivore [[Ass Pull|just happened to have a heart attack and die]] right before it attacked the main character, or that [[Hollywood Hacking|the hacker guessed his enemy's password on the first try just by typing random letters]], at least without [[Chekhov's Gun|some prior detail]] [[Justified Trope|justifying]] it or one of the Rules listed below coming into play. What is in [[Real Life]] impossible just has to be made the norm in the setting and kept consistent.
A common way of putting this is "You can ask an audience to believe the impossible, but not the improbable." For example, people will accept that [[A Wizard Did It|the Grand Mage can teleport across the world]], or that [[Stealth in Space|the spaceship has technology that makes it completely invisible]] without rendering its own sensors blind, but they won't accept that the ferocious carnivore [[Ass Pull|just happened to have a heart attack and die]] right before it attacked the main character,<ref>Even the monster in ''[[Monty Python and the Holy Grail]]'' didn't have an improbable heart attack; it was the ''animator's'' heart attack [[Breaking the Fourth Wall|on the other side of the Fourth Wall]] that impossibly saved the day.</ref> or that [[Hollywood Hacking|the hacker guessed his enemy's password on the first try just by typing random letters]], at least without [[Chekhov's Gun|some prior detail]] [[Justified Trope|justifying]] it or one of the Rules listed below coming into play. What is in [[Real Life]] impossible just has to be made the norm in the setting and kept consistent.


Most action movies push this trope almost to the breaking point; for the sake of action, the heroes can do virtually ''anything'', given enough [[Phlebotinum]].
Most action movies push this trope almost to the breaking point; for the sake of action, the heroes can do virtually ''anything'', given enough [[Phlebotinum]].
Line 14: Line 14:
Incidentally this is one of the more controversial elements of, believe it or not, [[Professional Wrestling]], and is heavily tied to [[Kayfabe]].
Incidentally this is one of the more controversial elements of, believe it or not, [[Professional Wrestling]], and is heavily tied to [[Kayfabe]].


Compare [[Acceptable Breaks From Reality]], [[Fourth Wall]], [[No Fourth Wall]], [[Gambit Roulette]], [[Gameplay and Story Segregation]], [[How Unscientific]], [[Kayfabe]], [[Lampshade Hanging]], [[Literary Agent Hypothesis]], [[Magic A Is Magic A]], [[Plausible Deniability]], [[Post Modernism]], and [[The "Unicorn In The Garden" Rule]].
==== See also: ====
* [[Acceptable Breaks From Reality]]
* [[Fourth Wall]] / [[No Fourth Wall]]
* [[Gambit Roulette]]
* [[Gameplay and Story Segregation]]
* [[How Unscientific]]
* [[Kayfabe]]
* [[Lampshade Hanging]]
* [[Literary Agent Hypothesis]]
* [[Magic a Is Magic A]]
* [[Plausible Deniability]]
* [[Post Modernism]]


{{Featured article}}
{{reflist}}
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Tropes of Legend]]
[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:Script Speak]]
[[Category:Meta Concepts]]
[[Category:Consistency]]
[[Category:Consistency]]
[[Category:Wall Banger (Darth Wiki)/Star Trek]]
[[Category:Mechanics of Writing]]
[[Category:Willing Suspension Of Disbelief]]
[[Category:Meta Concepts]]
[[Category:Trope]]
[[Category:Pages with working Wikipedia tabs]]
[[Category:Script Speak]]
[[Category:Tropes of Legend]]

Latest revision as of 17:11, 21 September 2020


/wiki/Willing Suspension of Disbeliefwork

Samuel Taylor Coleridge, the poet and author, called drama "that willing suspension of disbelief for the moment, which constitutes poetic faith ..."

Any creative endeavor, certainly any written creative endeavor, is only successful to the extent that the audience offers this willing suspension as they read, listen, or watch.

An author's work, in other words, does not have to be realistic, only believable and internally consistent (see Magic A Is Magic A). When the author pushes the audience too far, the work fails. As far as science fiction is concerned, viewers are usually willing to go along with creative explanations unless the show tries to use real science, at which point it's fair game, though this is because Science Fiction is just that: Science FICTION. Attempting to use actual science to explain something you made up removes the story from its own fantasy universe and places it in the context of reality. That's why people criticize your wormhole travel system or how shrink potion doesn't violate the laws of matter conservation. Suspension of disbelief can be broken even in science fiction when a show breaks its own established laws or places said laws outside of fiction.

A common way of putting this is "You can ask an audience to believe the impossible, but not the improbable." For example, people will accept that the Grand Mage can teleport across the world, or that the spaceship has technology that makes it completely invisible without rendering its own sensors blind, but they won't accept that the ferocious carnivore just happened to have a heart attack and die right before it attacked the main character,[1] or that the hacker guessed his enemy's password on the first try just by typing random letters, at least without some prior detail justifying it or one of the Rules listed below coming into play. What is in Real Life impossible just has to be made the norm in the setting and kept consistent.

Most action movies push this trope almost to the breaking point; for the sake of action, the heroes can do virtually anything, given enough Phlebotinum.

As always, the Rule of Cool, Rule of Cute, Rule of Drama, Rule of Funny, and Rule of Scary override nearly all other considerations. When the audience's disbelief, which was suspended during the show, gets reinstated some time afterward, what you get is Fridge Logic.

Incidentally this is one of the more controversial elements of, believe it or not, Professional Wrestling, and is heavily tied to Kayfabe.

Compare Acceptable Breaks From Reality, Fourth Wall, No Fourth Wall, Gambit Roulette, Gameplay and Story Segregation, How Unscientific, Kayfabe, Lampshade Hanging, Literary Agent Hypothesis, Magic A Is Magic A, Plausible Deniability, Post Modernism, and The "Unicorn In The Garden" Rule.

  1. Even the monster in Monty Python and the Holy Grail didn't have an improbable heart attack; it was the animator's heart attack on the other side of the Fourth Wall that impossibly saved the day.