Laughter. Subversion. Originality
Jenny is about to watch a movie called “A Knight in Shining Armor.” As a fan of romantic comedies, she has high expectations based on the trailer. She anticipates a story where a shy, nerdy boy meets an outgoing, hakuna-matata girl, their chemistry too intense for the silver screen. She expects a narrative of love, separation, and a reunion fueled by unyielding resolve. The movie meets her expectations, leaving her feeling content and warm, reminiscent of a familiar meal shared with friends over a weekend.
Sam, a comedy enthusiast, is excited to see “The Comedy of Errors.” He loves the genre and the trailer hints at a story full of mishaps and confusion. Caused by twins being at the wrong place at the wrong time. However, the movie turns out to be a dark murder mystery with satirical undertones, cleverly disguised and not revealed in the trailer. Sam is initially shocked but ultimately thrilled by this unexpected turn. The film, offering an experience like never before, becomes a favorite he enthusiastically recommends and watches repeatedly.
Sarah, a fan of political dramas, is about to watch “Succession Therapy.” The trailer suggests a story about the operations of business empires in the 1900s, aligning with her interests. However, the film turns out to be an overly detailed exposition of these empires, bordering on a documentary in its precision. While Sarah appreciates the genre, the film’s excessive detail makes it less likely for her to recommend.
* * *
All interest is instigated by the failure of prior expectations held by the agent, albeit subtly. Let’s understand what this means.
When Jenny goes in expecting a romantic-comedy and finds something along the lines of what she expects, she likes what she sees but eventually repeated exposure of expectation fulfillment, will lead to boredom.
On the other extreme, Sarah’s expectations were broken, but so very heavily that her experience could be equated with “noise”. She ended up suffering through a low level tutorial on political fights while expecting to watch an intriguing drama.
Sam, on the other hand, had his subjective expectations belied, subtly, and while expecting a goofy comedy he ended watching a satirical murder mystery. An experience of a lifetime.
All three experiences highlight a key aspect of storytelling and audience engagement: the significance of expectations, whether met, unmet, or contradicted. Jenny’s experience, aligning with her expectations, brings comfort but risks predictability and eventual boredom. Sarah’s expectations are heavily contradicted, turning her anticipated drama into an overwhelming deluge of information. Sam’s experience strikes a balance, with his expectations subtly subverted, turning a presumed comedy into a memorable and thought-provoking satire.
This concept, known as the information gap, is a cornerstone of storytelling. It’s the mathematical difference (technically called KL divergence) between the distribution of expectations and the experienced reality. When optimal, it keeps the audience engaged, but when too small, it leads to boredom, and when too large, it leads to rejection.
* * *
The easiest way to understand a practical everyday application of this idea is to pay attention to jokes which are funny.
“The inscription on the metal bands used by the US Department of the Interior to tag migratory birds was recently abruptly changed. The small rings, typically attached to one of the birds’ legs, used to bear the address of the Washington Biological Survey, which was abbreviated “Wash. Biol. Surv.” This practice continued until the agency received a letter from an irate Arkansas farmer stating: “Dear Sirs, I shot one of your pet crows, and followed the instructions you had wrote on it. I washed it, an’ I biled it, an’ I surved it. It was turrible! You shouldn’t be making fools of people like that.” The bands now read Fish and Wildlife Service.”
You set up some expectations around: wildlife, science and certain formalities and broke it subtly with someone misreading the instructions. (Apologies for explaining the joke).
In a future essay, we will explore how this principle relates to the some of the biggest challenges faced by recommender systems community. But for now, consider this: Following, the principle of information gap, more than knowledge requires one to be bold, bold enough to be embarrassed, bold enough to be unapologetically oneself, and point a finger at what one finds incongruous in their surroundings, that right there is where “interest” lies.
Quoting some lines from Rabindranath Tagore who puts it way better than me (loosely translated), “Even if they all cower in silence, find it within yourself to walk alone and speak out your mind, voice alone.”
* * *
Postscript:
Years ago I wrote some papers inspired from the idea of information gap which you can find here, if interested in going deeper. (link, link)
Amogh Mahapatra's Writings 