![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatWhile discussing Caprica with an offline friend the other day, I realized how hard it is for people to watch or read serials. Or rather was reminded of it. Serials are works in progress. They aren't complete. And we don't really know if or when they will be completed. My friend, who I'll call "M" stated that she was having difficulties with Caprica because nothing was being wrapped up, the story was just dragging on. While she could handle this with daytime soap operas...night-time dramas, that aired once a week, and often two weeks or months off in between airings, felt endless. When, she asked, will we get a resolution? At least with an episodic series or even a combo such as say, The Good Wife - I know one plot line is wrapped up at the end. I don't have to keep track of it. I don't have to invest time in it or worry over the characters...because I know each week it will be wrapped up.
I remember thinking as she explained this to me, that I was the opposite. Oh sure, I like to watch movies and the occassional short story or drabble - rather love some of them, actually. But, I prefer the unpredictability of the serial plot line, how it meanders, how we often don't know when or if it will end, how a character we love can without warning die, or a characters we never thought would get together in a million years...do, and you can go back, rewatch old episodes and think, yes, that works, and whoa, why didn't I see that? I like the slow unravel of the story, the attention to tiny details, each and every bit of a character being examined.
I also like trying to outsmart the author, speculating on what he or she will do next, what
they'll do with the characters...and love it when they come up with something better than I came up with, and hate it when they come up with something I think is far far worse.
Yes, I admit it. I am a serial junkie.
But, I was thinking about this as well today...in regards to writers and art and everything really. I think as a reader or viewer - I owe it to the writer or artist to give them the benefit of the doubt, to let them tell their story, without second-guessing what they may or may not do ahead of schedule. It's in a way like when a friend cancels on you. They give you no explanation. Just an email stating that they are sorry they have to cancel at the last minute but something came up. Years ago, back in the late 1980s, this was twenty years ago and my memory of the events is somewhat foggy as you can well imagine - I had this happen to me. A friend stood me up. Gave me no explanation. I freaked and left numerous messages on her machine. Then I got much to my chagrin - a message informing me that she'd been in the hospital the entire night with another friend who had tried to commit suicide. She never forgave me for freaking out. And I learned a valuable lesson from the experience, which is making assumptions without all the information is stupid and foolhardy. You don't know what is going on with another person. The same I think is true with a story...we don't know what is coming next until the story-teller tells us. We owe them the benefit of the doubt, until we get that next chapter.
But we are impatient creatures. I told "M" this the other day. That it takes a great deal of patience to stick with a serial...more than a novel that has a beginning, middle, or end.
Yet...if you don't have the patience or you know from past experience that the story-teller is going to disappoint you, then as a reader you are well within your rights to stop reading.
To give up. I know I have. I've lost count of the number of stories I gave up on, fanfic, non-fanfic, etc. WIP's are hard. Because you get invested, but you have no guarantee the writer will keep writing. I remember a while back Neil Gaiman scolding a fan of George RR Martin, who'd asked Neil if a writer had an obligation to complete a story he was telling, to wrap it up in a satisfying way for the reader. Martin had written a serial entitled Song of Ice and Fire - with the first novel being Game of Thrones, and the last novel, or so we were told, Dance of Dragons, yet to be released or even written. It should have been published at least three years ago, or maybe four, I've lost track. But Martin went off to write other things and has yet to publish or write it to my knowledge. Driving his fans batshit in the process.
Gaiman in a post that was linked all over my flist at the time, including by me, stated to the fan that Martin was well within his rights not to complete the story. That he had no obligation to his readers. And well, sorry, to put it this way, but the writer is not your bitch.
It is, he stated, your choice to read him. He has not promised you an end, necessarily.
And you can choose to stop. But the creative process is not something we can turn on at will and we can't do it on demand. It was an interesting comment. That I have mixed feelings about now.
In some respects...Gaiman is right. And if Martin and Gaiman were writing as a hobby or not being paid for their fiction, I would agree. But this is their vocation. It is their day job. They get paid by publishers to deliver a manuscript within a certain period of time. Other's jobs are dependent on their ability to deliver. It would be a bit like me deciding not to go to work tomorrow and not write those RFP's and memos, and termination agreements - because I didn't feel like it. Do I get writer's block writing those things? Of course I do. I have sat staring at my screen, then hunting for boilerplates, and often not finding them. OR a television writer telling the network brass that he can't deliver a script because you know, writer's block. You can't do that. So, when you promised paying readers that you are going to finish your serial and that it does have an end, and there is a pay-off for buying the books - you sort of owe them that ending. It's an arrogant writer who puts the buying customer on hold.
I remember when I was doing informational interviews in the publishing industry and comics industry (I sort of went everywhere that writing or books were involved) - more than one editor told me that the hardest part of their job was dealing with writers. They said writers have a tendency to be whiny, spoiled, and arrogant. And I remember at other companies that hired the dreaded creatives - the complaint was the same - the creatives are babies. They need to be coddled and stroked and catered to, it's annoying. As a writer, myself, and a creative, my back bristled when they made these comments. I'd have to work hard to bite my tongue. But now, reading professional writer's blogs? I'm finding myself nodding in agreement. Whiny is an understatement. Writing is hard work, but it is not as hard as getting up at 4am in the morning, driving 4 hours out in a blizzard to a railway track and looking at train that has derailed or driving out at 2am to see an accident, and blood everywhere. It's actually relatively easy. A lot of people write in their spare time. Which may explain why writer's get a bad rap? And they do. Tell someone you are a writer and they ask, what you've written, then their eyes glaze over, and well that's the end of it. Can't say I blame them. We've got people like Stephen King and Stephanie Meyer who clock over a million to two million a year, while people who hate what they do, struggle with it, are barely ecking out 20 bucks a month.
So, it's not surprising that a fan of say a Buffy comic, might be a little peeved that they won't get the final issue until sometime in 2011 or a fan of a George RR Martin novels isn't getting their fix until well whenever. What writers forget is without their fans, they don't have a living. They publish as long as we buy. If we decide to stop ecking out cash for Buffy comics, the Buffy comics stop being published. If we decide to stop watching Supernatural, that show gets canceled. The reader, the viewer, is the customer. So, yeah, in a way, the writer is our bitch. As long as they plan on getting paid for it. If they do it for free? Well that's a different story.
Don't misunderstand. I don't want the writer to cater to their fans. Not completely. In this respect, I think Gaiman is correct. The writer is not the fan's bitch - we do not tell them how or what to write in their story. Or what stories to write for us. Which to be honest, I think was more his point - that his fans should not tell him what or how to write his stories.
I'd be highly annoyed if Joss Whedon, for example, started reading his fan mail and decided, you know what? I am going to change this story to make this group of fans happy. To validate them, because I like them. Stupid move in any event, since with Buffy, which faction do you make happy? That's the problem with changing a story to validate a reader's desires or tastes - because all readers are unique, they aren't the same, and they have different needs. Whatever you choose to do, you will most likely piss some reader or viewer off. Someone is going to hate your story. Someone will be offended by your message. Someone will hate the relationship or characters you chose to explore or the fact that you chose to kill so and so off. Take for example the character of Dawn? Personally? I won't miss her - if he kills her off. I also think it could be a really cool and interesting twist for both the story and for the other characters. But, I know for a fact that there are people who would be royally peeved and hate the idea of Dawn dying. I think the writer should do what they want to do, and ignore us. If I wanted to see the fan's view of the story - I'd read their fanfic. That's what fanfic is for. But I also want to see the writer, the original creators, take on it. It used to annoy me no end when I'd read about fan's email campaigns to the writers and network to feature or focus on their "ship". Ugh. Daytime Soap Operas occasionally listened to them and you could always tell when they did, because the story would jump the shark until the writers figured out, okay, let's ignore the idiotic fans and just tell the story. Note to all writers out there - if a fan tells you exactly what they want corrected or dislike and it is clearly a subjective thing - such as can you please have Buffy end up happily ever after with X and tell X she loves him deeply? IGNORE THEM. If something bugs them, they can't quite express it, but it is clearly an objective thing - like say pacing, or the characters feel off somehow...DON'T. Fans are human and human beings tend to be fickle creatures, they won't respect you for catering to their whims - they can turn on a dime. But do be sure to deliver the story on time, or they'll wander off to a better one, elsewhere. Remember fickle and short attention spans.
There are days that I'm very happy I'm not the professional writer that I aspired to be.
As hard as my job is, at least I don't have to deal with constant reviews from people I don't know regarding it. Writer's love reviews. We just hate critical ones. Which unfortunately tend to be 75-80 percent of them on a good day.
I remember thinking as she explained this to me, that I was the opposite. Oh sure, I like to watch movies and the occassional short story or drabble - rather love some of them, actually. But, I prefer the unpredictability of the serial plot line, how it meanders, how we often don't know when or if it will end, how a character we love can without warning die, or a characters we never thought would get together in a million years...do, and you can go back, rewatch old episodes and think, yes, that works, and whoa, why didn't I see that? I like the slow unravel of the story, the attention to tiny details, each and every bit of a character being examined.
I also like trying to outsmart the author, speculating on what he or she will do next, what
they'll do with the characters...and love it when they come up with something better than I came up with, and hate it when they come up with something I think is far far worse.
Yes, I admit it. I am a serial junkie.
But, I was thinking about this as well today...in regards to writers and art and everything really. I think as a reader or viewer - I owe it to the writer or artist to give them the benefit of the doubt, to let them tell their story, without second-guessing what they may or may not do ahead of schedule. It's in a way like when a friend cancels on you. They give you no explanation. Just an email stating that they are sorry they have to cancel at the last minute but something came up. Years ago, back in the late 1980s, this was twenty years ago and my memory of the events is somewhat foggy as you can well imagine - I had this happen to me. A friend stood me up. Gave me no explanation. I freaked and left numerous messages on her machine. Then I got much to my chagrin - a message informing me that she'd been in the hospital the entire night with another friend who had tried to commit suicide. She never forgave me for freaking out. And I learned a valuable lesson from the experience, which is making assumptions without all the information is stupid and foolhardy. You don't know what is going on with another person. The same I think is true with a story...we don't know what is coming next until the story-teller tells us. We owe them the benefit of the doubt, until we get that next chapter.
But we are impatient creatures. I told "M" this the other day. That it takes a great deal of patience to stick with a serial...more than a novel that has a beginning, middle, or end.
Yet...if you don't have the patience or you know from past experience that the story-teller is going to disappoint you, then as a reader you are well within your rights to stop reading.
To give up. I know I have. I've lost count of the number of stories I gave up on, fanfic, non-fanfic, etc. WIP's are hard. Because you get invested, but you have no guarantee the writer will keep writing. I remember a while back Neil Gaiman scolding a fan of George RR Martin, who'd asked Neil if a writer had an obligation to complete a story he was telling, to wrap it up in a satisfying way for the reader. Martin had written a serial entitled Song of Ice and Fire - with the first novel being Game of Thrones, and the last novel, or so we were told, Dance of Dragons, yet to be released or even written. It should have been published at least three years ago, or maybe four, I've lost track. But Martin went off to write other things and has yet to publish or write it to my knowledge. Driving his fans batshit in the process.
Gaiman in a post that was linked all over my flist at the time, including by me, stated to the fan that Martin was well within his rights not to complete the story. That he had no obligation to his readers. And well, sorry, to put it this way, but the writer is not your bitch.
It is, he stated, your choice to read him. He has not promised you an end, necessarily.
And you can choose to stop. But the creative process is not something we can turn on at will and we can't do it on demand. It was an interesting comment. That I have mixed feelings about now.
In some respects...Gaiman is right. And if Martin and Gaiman were writing as a hobby or not being paid for their fiction, I would agree. But this is their vocation. It is their day job. They get paid by publishers to deliver a manuscript within a certain period of time. Other's jobs are dependent on their ability to deliver. It would be a bit like me deciding not to go to work tomorrow and not write those RFP's and memos, and termination agreements - because I didn't feel like it. Do I get writer's block writing those things? Of course I do. I have sat staring at my screen, then hunting for boilerplates, and often not finding them. OR a television writer telling the network brass that he can't deliver a script because you know, writer's block. You can't do that. So, when you promised paying readers that you are going to finish your serial and that it does have an end, and there is a pay-off for buying the books - you sort of owe them that ending. It's an arrogant writer who puts the buying customer on hold.
I remember when I was doing informational interviews in the publishing industry and comics industry (I sort of went everywhere that writing or books were involved) - more than one editor told me that the hardest part of their job was dealing with writers. They said writers have a tendency to be whiny, spoiled, and arrogant. And I remember at other companies that hired the dreaded creatives - the complaint was the same - the creatives are babies. They need to be coddled and stroked and catered to, it's annoying. As a writer, myself, and a creative, my back bristled when they made these comments. I'd have to work hard to bite my tongue. But now, reading professional writer's blogs? I'm finding myself nodding in agreement. Whiny is an understatement. Writing is hard work, but it is not as hard as getting up at 4am in the morning, driving 4 hours out in a blizzard to a railway track and looking at train that has derailed or driving out at 2am to see an accident, and blood everywhere. It's actually relatively easy. A lot of people write in their spare time. Which may explain why writer's get a bad rap? And they do. Tell someone you are a writer and they ask, what you've written, then their eyes glaze over, and well that's the end of it. Can't say I blame them. We've got people like Stephen King and Stephanie Meyer who clock over a million to two million a year, while people who hate what they do, struggle with it, are barely ecking out 20 bucks a month.
So, it's not surprising that a fan of say a Buffy comic, might be a little peeved that they won't get the final issue until sometime in 2011 or a fan of a George RR Martin novels isn't getting their fix until well whenever. What writers forget is without their fans, they don't have a living. They publish as long as we buy. If we decide to stop ecking out cash for Buffy comics, the Buffy comics stop being published. If we decide to stop watching Supernatural, that show gets canceled. The reader, the viewer, is the customer. So, yeah, in a way, the writer is our bitch. As long as they plan on getting paid for it. If they do it for free? Well that's a different story.
Don't misunderstand. I don't want the writer to cater to their fans. Not completely. In this respect, I think Gaiman is correct. The writer is not the fan's bitch - we do not tell them how or what to write in their story. Or what stories to write for us. Which to be honest, I think was more his point - that his fans should not tell him what or how to write his stories.
I'd be highly annoyed if Joss Whedon, for example, started reading his fan mail and decided, you know what? I am going to change this story to make this group of fans happy. To validate them, because I like them. Stupid move in any event, since with Buffy, which faction do you make happy? That's the problem with changing a story to validate a reader's desires or tastes - because all readers are unique, they aren't the same, and they have different needs. Whatever you choose to do, you will most likely piss some reader or viewer off. Someone is going to hate your story. Someone will be offended by your message. Someone will hate the relationship or characters you chose to explore or the fact that you chose to kill so and so off. Take for example the character of Dawn? Personally? I won't miss her - if he kills her off. I also think it could be a really cool and interesting twist for both the story and for the other characters. But, I know for a fact that there are people who would be royally peeved and hate the idea of Dawn dying. I think the writer should do what they want to do, and ignore us. If I wanted to see the fan's view of the story - I'd read their fanfic. That's what fanfic is for. But I also want to see the writer, the original creators, take on it. It used to annoy me no end when I'd read about fan's email campaigns to the writers and network to feature or focus on their "ship". Ugh. Daytime Soap Operas occasionally listened to them and you could always tell when they did, because the story would jump the shark until the writers figured out, okay, let's ignore the idiotic fans and just tell the story. Note to all writers out there - if a fan tells you exactly what they want corrected or dislike and it is clearly a subjective thing - such as can you please have Buffy end up happily ever after with X and tell X she loves him deeply? IGNORE THEM. If something bugs them, they can't quite express it, but it is clearly an objective thing - like say pacing, or the characters feel off somehow...DON'T. Fans are human and human beings tend to be fickle creatures, they won't respect you for catering to their whims - they can turn on a dime. But do be sure to deliver the story on time, or they'll wander off to a better one, elsewhere. Remember fickle and short attention spans.
There are days that I'm very happy I'm not the professional writer that I aspired to be.
As hard as my job is, at least I don't have to deal with constant reviews from people I don't know regarding it. Writer's love reviews. We just hate critical ones. Which unfortunately tend to be 75-80 percent of them on a good day.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-03-15 04:38 am (UTC)I owe it to the writer or artist to give them the benefit of the doubt, to let them tell their story, without second-guessing what they may or may not do ahead of schedule.
X-Files permanently effected my ability to assume a showrunner knows where he's going with a story, or even cares about where the story is going. Chris Carter didn't, and has since come right out and said they were winging it and making it up as they went along. And that this insanely complicated show had no bible.
And much as I think Joss Whedon is an amazing and gifted writer (and I really do) he put the final nail in my ability to watch serials.
The thing is, Joss really does seem to see Show as a continuously unrolling story. He doesn't appear to pay much (if any) attention to how Show is actually watched and the effect that should have on pacing the story. New episodes seen in random fits and starts spread over months, sometimes only one new show in a month ... that makes a huge difference in how a story is perceived by the viewers. Pacing isn't just the story in real time, it's also how the episodes filter through the much longer period they're view in.
And fundementally, I've also come to the conclusion that I'm not interested in the stories Joss wants to tell, only partially because of the way he wants to tell them. Somewhere along the way, showrunners started killing off regular charactors because the viewers need to not get comfortable with the charactors and the storyline. Joss is famous for saying he gives us what we need, not what we want.
No. At the end of the day, what I need is to be able to feel the charactors are going to end up in a good place. I just don't get that feeling from Joss, and I don't trust anyone else either. So that lets right out those stories that are going to drag out for years, with random charactors dead along the way.
So, no more serials for me.
no subject
Date: 2010-03-15 05:06 am (UTC)yeah... it is hard to please everyone, JKR finished HP on time, but I wish she had taken more time (and allowed some editing) so that the book was tighter and better written (IMO it was the worst of the 7, by far).
I'm waiting anxiously for Jim Butcher's next Dresden book (due out in a couple of months), but if he needed another year to get it right then I'd be cool with that (but VERY disappointed if I started to feel that I was never going to get another one ever).
I try to be forgiving of the authors I love, but I'm more bitter about a bad book than about a long delay. Similarly I resent an actor who gives a bad performance: I don't mind them taking a bad script for good money, but I expect them to try to do something with the character (Michael Caine was awesome in Jaws 7, the worst of all the Jaws movie franchise).
I'll forgive Joss for killing characters I love when the story moves me and feels important to me... and he can hook Buffy up with anyone he wants because I trust him to have an emotional payoff to make it work (I know that not everyone trusts Joss so completely! lol).
Okay, it is getting late and I'm meandering my own self....
Anyway, thanks for a very interesting/insightful post!
no subject
Date: 2010-03-15 04:46 pm (UTC)I tend to agree. More or less.
My complaint with Whedon's comics is actually more editorial in nature than writing. The comics are poorly paced, lots of gaps in contuity, and a tendency towards meandering - which has resulted in confusion and a loss of interest in the fanbase consumning them.
Those are issues that I lay at the editor's doorstep.
It is their job to tell the writer it needs to be tighter, or this character or arc doesn't quite work, or that character is completely off, etc. Writer's don't always see that. Most don't. We have a tendency to fall in love with our darlings, and we think the story is crystal clear - hence the need for a pair of additional eyes.
Your issues with JK Rowling's seventh book - should also be laid at the editor's feet. The editor clearly gave Rowling's free reign and did not attempt to get her to tighten the novel or tell her what might or should get cut. That's less Rowling's fault, and more Rowling's editor's. Editor's are part of the process.
Unfortunately due to cost restraints, more and more editors are becoming solely acquisitions or their experience is mainly acquistions - they don't know how to edit a novel or provide constructive criticism. I've met a few that made me realize this. And it does explain the decrease in quality across the board - for hot books.
In Tv - it's a bit different. The process is faster.
And editors are employed to ensure that everything matchs and the show is no longer than so many minutes.
In some respects TV shows are better edited than many books - because of the demands of the industry.
I'll forgive Joss for killing characters I love when the story moves me and feels important to me... and he can hook Buffy up with anyone he wants because I trust him to have an emotional payoff to make it work (I know that not everyone trusts Joss so completely! lol).
While I can't say that I completely trust the writer to pull it off..I don't trust any writer to do that, as a writer myself I know the pitfalls all too well.
And Whedon is a commericial writer - which means he is pulled in a lot of directions. Less flexibility. He can't do the type of stories many fanfic writers can do, without getting blasted. (ie. "well that sends out a negative feminist message, Joss Whedon just ruined his pop culture heroine and feminist role model!!" )
So, because of the fact that he has to cater to that spectrum of critical review, at least to a degree - I know that the story may not meet my expectations.
I do however agree with you...on the other bit. For me, as long as it makes sense, fits with the story, furthers the character's arc and provides a new angle, I'm fine with it. If it jumps the shark or goes off kilter, I get annoyed. It hasn't done that yet, in my opinion - although I know there are people who vehemently disagree. I can see how the characters got to this point, I see where they are going, and it does make logical sense and feels organic to the tale.
The problem with shipping characters or pairings is often the viewer or reader becomes blinded to the story. They just see that character or ship. Sort of like in our story, we only see ourselves, we only care about our role - not realizing that we may very well not be the lead player here or the most important thread in the tale. We are but one small thread.
Sure we play an important and vital role - but it is not the main one or only one. In other words, we can't see the forest for the trees. When you become too invested in a specific character or even an actor performing a role in a drama, you only see that character, that actor or that pairing. Everything else is only related to that. You are in effect only seeing two cedar trees and the vines covering them, even though you are standing in a forest that is populated by mostly pine and maple. If someone were to ask what trees were in that forest, you'd say cedar. Yet in actuality it is pine and maple with just a couple of cedar. The cedar are important, but so are the other trees.
no subject
Date: 2010-03-15 05:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-15 04:57 pm (UTC)I've been thinking about this and I'm not entirely sure it hasn't been strung out for a good reason and one that has relatively little to do with fans. Although he does comment on the fans.
There's a trope that I'm catching here or rather a pattern of a trope? He does it with Xander and Riley as well. And it all goes back to Joyce/Buffy/Hank Summers.
It's the asbentee father who has gone off to start a new family, leaving behind the devoted son. Which is not only a personal trope to the writer himself, but also one you can find in most religious theologies and mythologies. From the ancient Greek to modern Christian mythos.
I may write a longer post on this tonight, when I actually have time. None now. Assuming of course I have any brain power by then. ;-)
At any rate...what I see is:
Hank Summers divorces Joyce, is still involved with Buffy until around S2 or so, when realizes she no longer needs his protection, runs off with his secretary and has a new family and never comes back.
Riley leaves Buffy, after he discovers she doesn't need his protection, starts a new family elsewhere.
Xander stays behind, devoted to Buffy til the end, helps raise Dawn (her sister) and falls for Dawn. Devoted to women, particularly women stronger than he is - who are powerful - the demon mother.
Angel leaves Buffy, after he discovers she can't use his protection, starts a new family elsewhere.
Spike stays behind, devoted to Buffy til the end, helps raise Dawn. Devoted to women, particularly women stronger than he is, and demon or slayers.
no subject
Date: 2010-03-15 07:12 am (UTC)That said, I do think there are some pneumonia moments visible in the story. In two ways, one is fan service and one is anti-fanservice.
With fan service I mean stuff like Angel's appearance in chosen. It's a fan favorite character, it's the last episode, so he wrote him in, but it asked massive bending from previous characterization.
Of course fanservice never quite works, because what you do for one group, inevitably the other will hate, so it leads to that kind of backlash that I called antifanservice, like TGIQ. which has only one core message and that's "Will you finally move the fuck on?".
Imho both those moments lead to weakness in the actual plot, so I'm pretty much with you on ignoring the fans being the best way. And actually the vice versa thing, that the fans better ignore the behind stuff and just enjoy the story.