I ran across the following blog the other day, written by Margaret Falk, about the importance of the "meat" of the story--or its angle. Interestingly enough, she gave her example in the form of a hypothetical take on the Barbaro story.
According to Falk, if she were tapped to write the Barbaro story, she might focus on the Barbaro-Bernardini rivalry that never got a chance to play itself out. When all eyes were on Barbaro's breakdown in the Preakness, Bernardini ran away with the race, a feat that actually was eclipsed by Barbaro's accident.
In tracing the parallels between the two horses, Falk might create a sense of ironic tension that may or may not have actually existed, which is of course, a writer's perrogative. It is certainly an interesting perspective, and one that I never, ever considered, having been tapped to write the story.
Telling a story as well known as Barbaro's is a challenge because everyone knows how it ends. Which is why it is sometimes better to let the story go away for a while and then bring it back. Falk's take is to work with what actually existed--just use all the pieces.
We will never know if Barbaro would have beaten Bernardini in the Preakness, but it does make for interesting speculation. I personally think there is enough tension in the Barbaro story without adding hypothetical angst, but the addition of Bernardini as a character in the Barbaro story is certainly a valid suggestion.
Right now, I'm thinking that an even more interesting take might be to pick up where Barbaro left off and explore his legacy. So much good has come from such a horrific accident, that one is left to wonder at the "randomness" of it all. But that too, is equally speculative...
Stay tuned. I have a feeling that this story may come full circle in another year or so when Lentenor comes of age. And what a story that would be.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment