confused George R. R. Martin noises
He is definitely in the same camp as Hemingway. Hell, he's probably the president of that camp!
Personally, I don't like the idea that every single detail must have some significance to the plot. It's not realistic to how we see the real world, and it limits the storyteller's ability to add depth to their world.
There are some times that readers may be frustrated by an item not being put to use later in the story, such as a red herring in a mystery. But like you noted, the real world is full of red herrings, so it can be used to great artistic effect!
I hate when you’re watching like a B horror movie and the camera randomly pans to a sharp object on the wall. You just know that one hour from now that sharp object is going through the monsters chest.
For plays, I tend to think the "rule" is necessary. For movies, a little less so, since things can just be there for visual interest in a way they can't for plays.
But for novels and other fiction? Utter codswallop. When not writing for a visual performance, you build scenes in any way that works. This can include meaningless items being interacted with purely for that reason.
I have one of these to protect my red herrings
Looks like I HAVE to use it now
For example, if a writer features a gun in a story, there must be a reason for it, such as it being fired some time later in the plot.
For example, Robert Groves' acting masterclass.
