How to depict a non-mad oracle, but still show, not tell?
May 20, 2019 6:28 PM   Subscribe

Brandon Stark seems to fit the Mad Oracle trope, letting slip little tidbits of info and confusion once in a while. It's infuriating as a viewer, but how have authors depicted knowledgeable characters without turning into an exposition bore?

I haven't yet read the books, so my knowledge of Bran is based on the show, but it seems like crafty storytelling is more likely to be found in literature than filmed entertainment.
posted by ASCII Costanza head to Writing & Language (4 answers total) 1 user marked this as a favorite
 
Best answer: I don't know that we've really had a good look at what late-story Bran is like in the ASOIAF books--the plot just hasn't moved that far.

The TVTropes page for The Omniscient seems lika good place to start.
posted by Black Cordelia at 7:16 PM on May 20, 2019


Dune, maybe? Particularly Dune Messiah which is sort of about the problems of prescience. And then the Dune series was kind of a reaction to Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series, which is premised on a mathematical formula for predicting the future, but is kind of light on details. Foundation seems to suggest that knowing the future would be good and even necessary, Dune maybe argues the opposite.
posted by rodlymight at 9:03 PM on May 20, 2019 [1 favorite]


Best answer: Well, there's the classic instance of Cassandra, who was cursed to know the future but have no one believe her.

In Watchmen, there's Dr Manhattan, who has a viewpoint outside time; there's quite a lot in the graphic novel about how he sees the world, and how other characters react to him. (It's very unsettling for them.)

Aslan in the Narnia stories knows everything, being God; this is occasionally used for exposition, and when Lewis wants to keep the narrative unspoiled, he has Aslan be cryptic or not around.
posted by zompist at 2:15 AM on May 21, 2019 [1 favorite]


Kind of a weird example but it's top-of-mind right now:

The Adventure Zone podcast currently has a character who has the ability to see not "the future," but possible futures. Far-off events are fuzzy or impossible to see, while chronologically closer events are clearer - but their clarity depends on their likelihood of coming to pass, while still accounting for the possibility that someone could take action to change them. So, narratively, a high-stakes battle with many wild-card factors would be extremely difficult for this character to predict the outcome of, though they might be able to give some inkling of the most likely outcomes.
posted by showbiz_liz at 8:45 AM on May 21, 2019 [1 favorite]


« Older Teething toys for toddlers?   |   Confused about Medicare and Medicaid copays Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.