I'll offer the caveat that I think an author can get away with anything if the writing's good enough. I've certainly enjoyed books or shows that should put me off but don't because they do it so well.
Yes and no.
No one to date has sold me on the number #1. And there's some very good writers who have tried. LOL!
Shakespeare however, and Sondheim/Bernstein did a decent job with # 3 (One True Love - I think that is number 3?) Romeo and Juliet, Joss Whedon, Stephanie Meyer and Julie Plec not so much.
Trying to think of a writer, outside of maybe Shakespeare who invented some of these, who has sold me on any of the above (outside of 1, which no one has sold me on)? Can't think of anyone...maybe, no, Whedon lost me most of the time when he tried it.
That said - as a riff on your #2, something that really bugs me is loss of reader agency, when we're told and expected to feel a certain way or draw conclusions about characters' actions that absolutely have to be the way the author intended or the story's universe won't work.
You mean audience/reader suspension of disbelief? Or something else... more like...complicit agreement with or ...just going along with the writer's moral agenda whatever that may be?
24 lost me on both. 1) I was supposed to believe that Jack could do all these things within a 24 hour time period, when I knew for a fact that it takes at least four hours to drive into LA each morning. 2) I was supposed to think that Jack would obtain great and useful information through torture. No, that's not possible. When someone is tortured they will tell you basically anything to get you to stop, whether or not its true...is anyone's guess. No...this was "revenge fantasy stuff" - let's torture the evil terrorists. (so yes, I think I agree..)
Vamp Diaries is losing me for similar reasons...as did for that matter Angel, Lost, Dollhouse, BSG, and Buffy.
It does take you right out of the story, doesn't it? You're far too busy arguing with the writer about the plot dynamics, universe, world-building choices, and/or character motivations which are supposed to further his/her moral message or general theme to enjoy the tale.
Although to be fair to Angel...I'm still not entirely sure what the writers intended there. Nor am I certain the writers know for that matter. There appears to have been a difference of opinion in the writing room. One group thought Angel could be redeemed or was on a journey of redemption, another thought he didn't need to be redeemed, since Angel and Angelus were two separate entities, and a third thought he couldn't be redeemed and was just evil. The disagreement made for some very confusing story-threads. Interesting, but confusing.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2012-12-02 11:28 pm (UTC)Yes and no.
No one to date has sold me on the number #1. And there's some very good writers who have tried. LOL!
Shakespeare however, and Sondheim/Bernstein did a decent job with # 3 (One True Love - I think that is number 3?) Romeo and Juliet, Joss Whedon, Stephanie Meyer and Julie Plec not so much.
Trying to think of a writer, outside of maybe Shakespeare who invented some of these, who has sold me on any of the above (outside of 1, which no one has sold me on)? Can't think of anyone...maybe, no, Whedon lost me most of the time when he tried it.
That said - as a riff on your #2, something that really bugs me is loss of reader agency, when we're told and expected to feel a certain way or draw conclusions about characters' actions that absolutely have to be the way the author intended or the story's universe won't work.
You mean audience/reader suspension of disbelief? Or something else...
more like...complicit agreement with or ...just going along with the writer's moral agenda whatever that may be?
24 lost me on both. 1) I was supposed to believe that Jack could do all these things within a 24 hour time period, when I knew for a fact that it takes at least four hours to drive into LA each morning.
2) I was supposed to think that Jack would obtain great and useful information through torture. No, that's not possible. When someone is tortured they will tell you basically anything to get you to stop, whether or not its true...is anyone's guess. No...this was "revenge fantasy stuff" - let's torture the evil terrorists. (so yes, I think I agree..)
Vamp Diaries is losing me for similar reasons...as did for that matter Angel, Lost, Dollhouse, BSG, and Buffy.
It does take you right out of the story, doesn't it? You're far too busy arguing with the writer about the plot dynamics, universe, world-building choices, and/or character motivations which are supposed to further his/her moral message or general theme to enjoy the tale.
Although to be fair to Angel...I'm still not entirely sure what the writers intended there. Nor am I certain the writers know for that matter. There appears to have been a difference of opinion in the writing room. One group thought Angel could be redeemed or was on a journey of redemption, another thought he didn't need to be redeemed, since Angel and Angelus were two separate entities, and a third thought he couldn't be redeemed and was just evil. The disagreement made for some very confusing story-threads. Interesting, but confusing.