![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat1. Day 18 – A book that disappointed you
Ah, what to pick? The last five books that I read disappointed me. There aren't that many good novels out there at the moment, or I'm not reading them - most likely the latter.
The Elizabet Naughton novel Wait for Me disappointed me. It had a great idea, hit all my story kinks, but was so poorly executed. It was about woman living in Texas who was in a car accident and lost her memory. Two months later, her husband, a doctor who is involved in creating pharmeceuticals - dies in a plane crash. Overwhelmed with grief and guilt, because she doesn't remember her husband or her life with him to really feel much of anything, she rifles through some of his things, and discovers a picture of a little girl that looks like her - she also discovers a file that indicates she spent two years in nursing home in California. It gets better, apparently her husband was her attending physician at the the nursing home. So hunting answers she flies to California, takes a job with a publishing company - she's a science journalist specializing in geology, and tries to investigate. Hits dead ends. So her editor suggests she hire an attorney. She by-passes the editor's suggestion and hires a woman she finds on the net - whose name jumps out at her. Turns out the woman new her before. Even weirder - turns out she was somebody else entirely, had a different life, different husband, and has a teenage daughter...
The novel dealt with memory loss and being reunited with someone you thought was dead.
But the execution is so bad...that the ideas never get flushed out or dealt with. We spent 95% of the novel with the male and female leads either lusting after each other, or worrying about what the other thought of them. This has been a problem with 95% of the romance novels I've read to date. The writer just isn't talented enough to flush out the ideas. Or they focus too much on the UST or sex, and not enough on character and flushing out the story.
What's always frustrated me about the following genres is this:
* Romance novels - focus too much on getting the two characters horizontal or in the sack, then don't seem to know what to do with them once they got them there? Okay, we reached our main goal...now what? Also often the sex is anti-climatic. Too much UST or sex, not enough banter, story, character development.
* Sci-Fi novels and Fantasy novels: focus too much on the setting, world-building, hardware or software as the case may be, mythology, or theme (ie...this is a morality tale about (fill in the blank) - and not enough time on character development, character relationships, plot, and building those characters. Yes, yes, it's nice to have the schematics of how to build your very own space ship or how ley line magic works - but seriously, if I wanted to read about that - I'd check out a book on building my very own space ship not be reading it here. Give me more story, less world-building. This is also true with theme/moral/philosophy based sci-fi - less moralizing/philosophizing - more story.
* Mystery novels - too much time spent on the plot mechanics or how we are going to solve the murder of the week, with all the procedurals bits and pieces, not enough on characters or actual plot.
* Literary novels - too much time spent on writing beautiful moody descriptive passages that while philosophically moving, take us nowhere. Too little plot, too little character development, too much realism and prose.
Another specific book that disappointed me was Mockinjay - book three of The Hunger Games. I still think this book would have worked better in third person. In first - it's sort of sluggish. Katniss doesn't do much in the first half of it, except worry about things and try to figure out how she feels towards people. Also if it had been in third person they'd have been able to develop Finnick and Joanna better, along with Gale and Pris. First person narratives can often become slightly whiny. Particularly with female heroines, for some reason. Male not so much. Kim Harrison's Ever After had the same problem. I think the book would have been better if it had been in 3rd person - because we could have been in on the action, instead of hearing about it after the fact because our pov person isn't there.
* Speaking of books? If you live in NYC, or Brooklyn, or have family who is? Please sign this petition to save the New York Public Libaries from demolition by the Bloomberg Economic Developer Act.
http://signon.org/sign/save-new-york-city-libraries/?source=search
Day 19 – Favorite book turned into a movie
Day 20 – Favorite romance book
Day 21 – Favorite book from your childhood
Day 22 – Favorite book you own
Day 23 – A book you wanted to read for a long time but still haven’t
Day 24 – A book that you wish more people have read
Day 25 – A character who you can relate to the most
Day 26 – A book that changed your opinion about something
Day 27 – The most surprising plot twist or ending
Day 28 – Favorite title
Day 29 – A book everyone hated but you liked
Day 30 – Your favorite book of all time
2.Day 21 - Favorite ship
You know this can be interpreted more than one way, right?
* Actual literal Ship? Simple. No contest. The Tardis. While Moya on Farscape had her charms, the Tardis is just plain innovative and wonky. It's the only ship in the history of sci-fi that I know of that defies physics completely, and can go back and forward in time and space, without following any rules. Or maybe that's just its drivers?
* Relationship or "Ship" defined by fan terms as a romantic fictional character relationship. Not sure if can be platonic. I'm guessing not - because people don't tend to, ahem, go bat-shit crazy over platonic relationships. Romantic ones, yes. Platonic ones, not so much. I mean have you seen any shipper wars over Buffy and Willow's friendship? I didn't think so. You can more than one friend after all. But being a relatively monogamous based society - you can't have more than one "TRue Love" or "romantic relationship" - well not at the same time and without being vilified at any rate.
This becomes a rather boring meme if we did "ship" literally - because that's not controversial. I really can't see many fans fighting over whether the Starship Enterprise or the Tardis is the better ship. Okay, maybe they would, but the Enterprise fans would lose - the Tardis is a)bigger than the Enterprise, b) can go an unlimited number of places, c)can land anywhere and hide in plain sight - either by looking exactly like a British police phone booth, or just being invisible, d)can go back and forth in time, e)can deliver people places without teleportation malfunctions.
It should be noted, prior to 2002, I always defined "ship" as well an actual ship either a sea-going vessel or flying one. Like the Tardis, Moya, Starship Enterprise, Galatica...Millenium Falcon and Firefly. There's a limited number of ships in fiction and I can't remember most of them.
Anyhow...favorite RELATIONShip? Eh...this is a difficult question. I have about five or six. And it's mainly based on how interesting they were.
* Most Torturous and the worst nickname? Spuffy or Spike/Buffy - this ship's torturous for two reasons, 1)the bat-shit crazy fandom. I don't know what it is about this particular pairing that drives normal, law-abiding, fairly sane folks bat-shit crazy? Doesn't matter if they like it or not. Actually some of the people who hate it - have reacted far crazier than the one's who loved it. Nothing derails a public discussion forum faster than the Spuffy ship. 2) the way the writers handled it, and every other professional writer who has written about it has - which is basically to relentlessly tease the audience to death. Their writing style reminds me of a magician's sleight of hand...where's the card? Oh there's the card, no wait, it's not there, it's over here.
Both of these factors make this ship sort of difficult to enjoy. It's just too bloody painful. I finally gave up on it and on the writers, sadistic bastards. I'm not that masochistic, thank you. I require some sense of closure.
* Most romantically satisfying and resolved, not to mention subversive? Aeryn Sun/John Crichton -This ship reminded me a great deal of Spuffy, except minus the bat-shit crazy fandom (possibly helped by the fact that I began watching it two years after the show had been cancelled and the fandom dispersed.) and the indecisive writing. Crichton/Aeryn is better written than Spuffy was and more rewarding. It had the gender reversals. Aeryn is the tough fighter pilot or rogue pilot, Crichton the weaker, more feminine scientist/explorer.
Crichton is often the girl in their relationship - he admits his feelings but never is quite certain of hers. In the 4th season this flipped around a bit, but Aeryn still felt more masculain - a protector, to Crichton's nurturer/compassion.
It was resolved well - they got married, they had a kid, they saved the universe, and had a happy ever after. It also has comic books - but I wisely ignored them or rather just couldn't locate them. (actually the latter).
* Fun romantic ships or ships that were the most fun and entertaining? Doctor Song/Doctor Who, a marriage of equals more or less. I was admittedly less than satisfied with certain aspects of Song's arc and felt Moffat like a lot of male writers out there has some unresolved Mommy issues, but other than that? It was gleefully fun. And I loved it to pieces. The other one is Doctor Who/Tardis
* Best family ships? My favorite ship of the entire Buffy and Angel series isn't what you'd think. Spike/Angel/Connor/Darla/Dru - yes, the fanged family, and it's a shame I can't do that ship as a circle. That was my favorite ship. I thought they were fun. And loved the chemistry between them. It also helped that the fandom didn't go batshit crazy over them, and the writers dealt with them fairly consistently and not either overtly moralistically or teasingly.
Actually what killed Bangle for me as a viewer, besides that IWRY, was Darla and Angel. I was over Bangle long before Spike entered the scene. As were the writers. Once I saw that pairing, I knew Buffy wasn't Angel's true love or first love, that was Darla. He had a deeper bond than Spike did with Dru. Darla and Angel got each other. They were, as Darla states at one point, soul-mates. And Connor was their result. I also adored Angel/Spike. I was disappointed that the writers didn't explore the Spike/Connor relationship more on the series - this may explain why I liked Bryan Lynch's comics - he actually did address it and play with it.
Currently my favorite ship on tv is Cora/Regina/Charming/Snow/Emma/Henry/Neal/Bae/Rumplestilskin/Hook on Once Upon a Time - it's also a lot of fun and sort of needs to be done in a circle for you to get it, with lots of interacting lines. I could very easily get obsessed over this ship. I love complicated ships that are not just about romance, but have all sorts of other subtexts. You can do more. Romantic ships are frustrating, because it's like what I stated above regarding the genre, the writers spend all this time trying to get them to have sex, and then, once they do - it's...okay, now what? But with non-romantic relationships or relationships that about more than well sex, you don't have that problem.
There's no dead-end.
Day 22 - Favorite series finale
Day 23 - Most annoying character
Day 24 - Best quote
Day 25 - A show you plan on watching (old or new)
Day 26 - OMG WTF? Season finale
Day 27 - Best pilot episode
Day 28 - First TV show obsession
Day 29 - Current TV show obsession
Day 30 - Saddest character death.
Ah, what to pick? The last five books that I read disappointed me. There aren't that many good novels out there at the moment, or I'm not reading them - most likely the latter.
The Elizabet Naughton novel Wait for Me disappointed me. It had a great idea, hit all my story kinks, but was so poorly executed. It was about woman living in Texas who was in a car accident and lost her memory. Two months later, her husband, a doctor who is involved in creating pharmeceuticals - dies in a plane crash. Overwhelmed with grief and guilt, because she doesn't remember her husband or her life with him to really feel much of anything, she rifles through some of his things, and discovers a picture of a little girl that looks like her - she also discovers a file that indicates she spent two years in nursing home in California. It gets better, apparently her husband was her attending physician at the the nursing home. So hunting answers she flies to California, takes a job with a publishing company - she's a science journalist specializing in geology, and tries to investigate. Hits dead ends. So her editor suggests she hire an attorney. She by-passes the editor's suggestion and hires a woman she finds on the net - whose name jumps out at her. Turns out the woman new her before. Even weirder - turns out she was somebody else entirely, had a different life, different husband, and has a teenage daughter...
The novel dealt with memory loss and being reunited with someone you thought was dead.
But the execution is so bad...that the ideas never get flushed out or dealt with. We spent 95% of the novel with the male and female leads either lusting after each other, or worrying about what the other thought of them. This has been a problem with 95% of the romance novels I've read to date. The writer just isn't talented enough to flush out the ideas. Or they focus too much on the UST or sex, and not enough on character and flushing out the story.
What's always frustrated me about the following genres is this:
* Romance novels - focus too much on getting the two characters horizontal or in the sack, then don't seem to know what to do with them once they got them there? Okay, we reached our main goal...now what? Also often the sex is anti-climatic. Too much UST or sex, not enough banter, story, character development.
* Sci-Fi novels and Fantasy novels: focus too much on the setting, world-building, hardware or software as the case may be, mythology, or theme (ie...this is a morality tale about (fill in the blank) - and not enough time on character development, character relationships, plot, and building those characters. Yes, yes, it's nice to have the schematics of how to build your very own space ship or how ley line magic works - but seriously, if I wanted to read about that - I'd check out a book on building my very own space ship not be reading it here. Give me more story, less world-building. This is also true with theme/moral/philosophy based sci-fi - less moralizing/philosophizing - more story.
* Mystery novels - too much time spent on the plot mechanics or how we are going to solve the murder of the week, with all the procedurals bits and pieces, not enough on characters or actual plot.
* Literary novels - too much time spent on writing beautiful moody descriptive passages that while philosophically moving, take us nowhere. Too little plot, too little character development, too much realism and prose.
Another specific book that disappointed me was Mockinjay - book three of The Hunger Games. I still think this book would have worked better in third person. In first - it's sort of sluggish. Katniss doesn't do much in the first half of it, except worry about things and try to figure out how she feels towards people. Also if it had been in third person they'd have been able to develop Finnick and Joanna better, along with Gale and Pris. First person narratives can often become slightly whiny. Particularly with female heroines, for some reason. Male not so much. Kim Harrison's Ever After had the same problem. I think the book would have been better if it had been in 3rd person - because we could have been in on the action, instead of hearing about it after the fact because our pov person isn't there.
* Speaking of books? If you live in NYC, or Brooklyn, or have family who is? Please sign this petition to save the New York Public Libaries from demolition by the Bloomberg Economic Developer Act.
http://signon.org/sign/save-new-york-city-libraries/?source=search
Day 19 – Favorite book turned into a movie
Day 20 – Favorite romance book
Day 21 – Favorite book from your childhood
Day 22 – Favorite book you own
Day 23 – A book you wanted to read for a long time but still haven’t
Day 24 – A book that you wish more people have read
Day 25 – A character who you can relate to the most
Day 26 – A book that changed your opinion about something
Day 27 – The most surprising plot twist or ending
Day 28 – Favorite title
Day 29 – A book everyone hated but you liked
Day 30 – Your favorite book of all time
2.Day 21 - Favorite ship
You know this can be interpreted more than one way, right?
* Actual literal Ship? Simple. No contest. The Tardis. While Moya on Farscape had her charms, the Tardis is just plain innovative and wonky. It's the only ship in the history of sci-fi that I know of that defies physics completely, and can go back and forward in time and space, without following any rules. Or maybe that's just its drivers?
* Relationship or "Ship" defined by fan terms as a romantic fictional character relationship. Not sure if can be platonic. I'm guessing not - because people don't tend to, ahem, go bat-shit crazy over platonic relationships. Romantic ones, yes. Platonic ones, not so much. I mean have you seen any shipper wars over Buffy and Willow's friendship? I didn't think so. You can more than one friend after all. But being a relatively monogamous based society - you can't have more than one "TRue Love" or "romantic relationship" - well not at the same time and without being vilified at any rate.
This becomes a rather boring meme if we did "ship" literally - because that's not controversial. I really can't see many fans fighting over whether the Starship Enterprise or the Tardis is the better ship. Okay, maybe they would, but the Enterprise fans would lose - the Tardis is a)bigger than the Enterprise, b) can go an unlimited number of places, c)can land anywhere and hide in plain sight - either by looking exactly like a British police phone booth, or just being invisible, d)can go back and forth in time, e)can deliver people places without teleportation malfunctions.
It should be noted, prior to 2002, I always defined "ship" as well an actual ship either a sea-going vessel or flying one. Like the Tardis, Moya, Starship Enterprise, Galatica...Millenium Falcon and Firefly. There's a limited number of ships in fiction and I can't remember most of them.
Anyhow...favorite RELATIONShip? Eh...this is a difficult question. I have about five or six. And it's mainly based on how interesting they were.
* Most Torturous and the worst nickname? Spuffy or Spike/Buffy - this ship's torturous for two reasons, 1)the bat-shit crazy fandom. I don't know what it is about this particular pairing that drives normal, law-abiding, fairly sane folks bat-shit crazy? Doesn't matter if they like it or not. Actually some of the people who hate it - have reacted far crazier than the one's who loved it. Nothing derails a public discussion forum faster than the Spuffy ship. 2) the way the writers handled it, and every other professional writer who has written about it has - which is basically to relentlessly tease the audience to death. Their writing style reminds me of a magician's sleight of hand...where's the card? Oh there's the card, no wait, it's not there, it's over here.
Both of these factors make this ship sort of difficult to enjoy. It's just too bloody painful. I finally gave up on it and on the writers, sadistic bastards. I'm not that masochistic, thank you. I require some sense of closure.
* Most romantically satisfying and resolved, not to mention subversive? Aeryn Sun/John Crichton -This ship reminded me a great deal of Spuffy, except minus the bat-shit crazy fandom (possibly helped by the fact that I began watching it two years after the show had been cancelled and the fandom dispersed.) and the indecisive writing. Crichton/Aeryn is better written than Spuffy was and more rewarding. It had the gender reversals. Aeryn is the tough fighter pilot or rogue pilot, Crichton the weaker, more feminine scientist/explorer.
Crichton is often the girl in their relationship - he admits his feelings but never is quite certain of hers. In the 4th season this flipped around a bit, but Aeryn still felt more masculain - a protector, to Crichton's nurturer/compassion.
It was resolved well - they got married, they had a kid, they saved the universe, and had a happy ever after. It also has comic books - but I wisely ignored them or rather just couldn't locate them. (actually the latter).
* Fun romantic ships or ships that were the most fun and entertaining? Doctor Song/Doctor Who, a marriage of equals more or less. I was admittedly less than satisfied with certain aspects of Song's arc and felt Moffat like a lot of male writers out there has some unresolved Mommy issues, but other than that? It was gleefully fun. And I loved it to pieces. The other one is Doctor Who/Tardis
* Best family ships? My favorite ship of the entire Buffy and Angel series isn't what you'd think. Spike/Angel/Connor/Darla/Dru - yes, the fanged family, and it's a shame I can't do that ship as a circle. That was my favorite ship. I thought they were fun. And loved the chemistry between them. It also helped that the fandom didn't go batshit crazy over them, and the writers dealt with them fairly consistently and not either overtly moralistically or teasingly.
Actually what killed Bangle for me as a viewer, besides that IWRY, was Darla and Angel. I was over Bangle long before Spike entered the scene. As were the writers. Once I saw that pairing, I knew Buffy wasn't Angel's true love or first love, that was Darla. He had a deeper bond than Spike did with Dru. Darla and Angel got each other. They were, as Darla states at one point, soul-mates. And Connor was their result. I also adored Angel/Spike. I was disappointed that the writers didn't explore the Spike/Connor relationship more on the series - this may explain why I liked Bryan Lynch's comics - he actually did address it and play with it.
Currently my favorite ship on tv is Cora/Regina/Charming/Snow/Emma/Henry/Neal/Bae/Rumplestilskin/Hook on Once Upon a Time - it's also a lot of fun and sort of needs to be done in a circle for you to get it, with lots of interacting lines. I could very easily get obsessed over this ship. I love complicated ships that are not just about romance, but have all sorts of other subtexts. You can do more. Romantic ships are frustrating, because it's like what I stated above regarding the genre, the writers spend all this time trying to get them to have sex, and then, once they do - it's...okay, now what? But with non-romantic relationships or relationships that about more than well sex, you don't have that problem.
There's no dead-end.
Day 22 - Favorite series finale
Day 23 - Most annoying character
Day 24 - Best quote
Day 25 - A show you plan on watching (old or new)
Day 26 - OMG WTF? Season finale
Day 27 - Best pilot episode
Day 28 - First TV show obsession
Day 29 - Current TV show obsession
Day 30 - Saddest character death.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 12:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 12:57 am (UTC)Bander? Spangle? LOL! Or how about Tillow or Wara?
It was ironic. Silly name, horrifically tragic story arc. Course, Mutant Enemy are many things, but light and cheerful romance writers aren't among them.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 02:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 02:56 am (UTC)First person narratives can often become slightly whiny.
I've actually become very hesitant of reading 1st person narratives unless the voice is amazing or it does something really new (i.e. if the writer has mastered the form.) The character has to be fascinating or it becomes dull very quickly for me.
I mean have you seen any shipper wars over Buffy and Willow's friendship? I didn't think so.
OTOH, the SG vs Spike wars (as I'll call them) can be just as heated as the ship wars ("the SG were just AWFUL and terrible for not seeing how wonderful Spike was" or "that bastard Spike was so evil AND he took over the show from the Scoobies". etc, ad nauseum, ad infinitum.) I guess it depends on which corner of fandom we're in? I'm not sure if that's quite the same thing. But I think you're right that "ship" doesn't mean "friendship". I actually wish there was more "gen" fic in this fandom - and what the heck does "gen" mean? "general"? Well that's perfectly vague and unspecific.
the worst nickname? Spuffy
IDK, "Briley" sucks goose eggs too IMO. But I hate all the "smashed together monikers" in this fandom. I don't know if they exist in other fandoms, but I always hated the ones the media used for celebrity couples "Bennifer" "Brangelina" etc. they seemed childish to me, and I hate even the metaphorical implication that two people are merged into one being. I've been in this fandom just shy of a year, and when I see "Spangle" etc I still have to stop and puzzle out who is being referred to. I'll use the terms as shorthand because they are used in the fandom, but mostly under protest. "Bangle" gives me less pause because I rarely refer to it and don't give a damn about it anymore anyway. Whereas Buffy and Spike - I prefer B/S or Buffy/Spike. It doesn't take me any longer to type.
Nothing derails a public discussion forum faster than the Spuffy ship.
*nods* I came to this fandom less than a year ago, loving the late seasons (I still do), fascinated by Buffy and Spike (I still am), and wanting to write and talk about them and parse out their arcs. Now I hesitate to do so; I'll talk about them when someone else brings them up, but on my own LJ? I'm utterly gun-shy. I've seen all the arguments, and the way the battle lines are drawn, and there doesn't seem to be any room to move or even breathe. And this is tough as a newbie because I am (trying to) processing the show just as any fan has done over the last fifteen years, but it doesn't feel safe to do so when it comes to Buffy/Spike and especially S6. I don't have the energy it requires for the fight and I'd rather not fight, I'd rather celebrate.
Actually what killed Bangle for me as a viewer, besides that IWRY
The episode that probably killed it for me was Beauty and the Beasts. I remember actually being quite angry when he came back from Hell; I was just about spitting at the screen "leave the poor girl alone and let her achieve closure and move on!" (Yes, I'm protective of Buffy.) Anything after that was just more nails in the coffin lid.
I haven't watched AtS beyond a couple of episodes; if I do it at some point it will probably be so I can track the Angel/Darla relationship. I agree it's endlessly fascinating just from what little I know of it.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 02:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 02:15 pm (UTC)Now there's a family Thanksgiving that would really "suck."
And back in the day, there was the So Awesome Luke+Darth Vadar+Leia.
And now I'm with you on OUAT. It starts for me with Emma+Henry, then expands to Emma+Henry+Neal, blossoms out to Charming-Snow, E+H+N, and then to the very delicious Charming-Snow, E+H+Neal/Baelfire+Rumplestiltskin, and of course Charming-Snow, E+H+Neal/Baelfire+Rumplestiltskin/Milah/Hook.
Oh right, Regina is in there, too, somewhere, and I like her, but I don't like where they're hinting at Rumple/Cora. Bleh, bleh, bleh.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 02:27 pm (UTC)Took me a while to puzzle out who SG was - Scooby Gang, right? And not quite the same thing. I was really just talking about friendships like Buffy/Willow, or Riley/Xander ...not group relationships. Groups are different in my head. I guess a group dynamic is Angle/Darla/Connor/Dru/Spike. But that's more family than friendship. I never really considered Spike part of the Scooby Gang or a member of that group.
Also those fights only were in S6 and S7, so not too general. At any rate that never occurred to me and I completely forgot about it.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 03:12 pm (UTC)I understand how Bangels would be upset, but honestly, I always saw it that way.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 03:16 pm (UTC)The Darla arc (S2) on AtS is (JMHO) the best part of the series.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 03:18 pm (UTC)Although, this show is becoming a tad too incestuous...bordering on daytime soap opera incestuousness. Does every single lead character have to have either romantic or familial ties to another one? IF Regina turns out to be Rumple's kid too, I'll be annoyed.
Shipping familial relationships is safer than romantic ones. I do it too, depends on the relationships and I'm admittedly a canonical story-thread shipper (by that I mean I do not tend to ship outside of canon.)
I definitely shipped Angle/Connor/Darla on Angel. I also did Angle/Spike which felt familial to me at any rate, and Dru/Darla. (I shipped them as more as siblings not as father/son or romantic pairings. ) And I did Buffy/Dawn/Spike in S5. (They split it apart in S6 and it never came back again). And I also did Luke/Darth/Leia. I think that was one of the reasons I was obsessed with Star Wars and the prequels, and got so annoyed at Lucas for screwing it up.
In ONCE? It's fun. Right now it was Emma/Henry, then Snow/Emma/Henry, then Charming/Henry, then Emma/Henry/Neal, which became Charming--Snow/Emma/Henry/Bae(NEal)--Rumple>>Millah>>Hook....with Regina in there somewhere. Cora annoys me. I won't mind it they kill her off.
Barbara Hershey is wonderful, but I don't like Cora.
then Emman/Henry/
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 03:23 pm (UTC)The Spike Wars weren't that bad at ATPO, mainly because it wasn't a spoiler board - whole different dynamic.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 03:26 pm (UTC)The writers got off on teasing them though, it was a way to boost ratings, at times painfully obvious.
Never romantically ship a pairing on a Whedon series. Whedon is not a romance writer.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 03:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 03:55 pm (UTC)Plus, I like Henry, senior. I want that to be Regina's real father, and find out more about how Cora and he got together (no doubt he was some rich, hapless duke or baron that she married for his money).
Not to mention if Regina is in that family tree by biology and then continues to get side-lined by everyone so that she lashes out in angrymagic!OMG it's Morgana revisited and *snore* [no season 5 spoilers if you take this Merlin reference and run with it, plz].
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 09:05 pm (UTC)Agreed. Then it just becomes ludicrous. There's one day-time soap that I gave up on, because literally everybody was related to each other, after a while you began to think...okay, last time I checked there are other people around...you aren't living on an island.
There is such a thing is too incestuous. Let's stop with the current relations, please. Regina as Snow's step-mother/surrogate mother works on its own. We don't need Bae to be related to her too. The story is hard enough to follow as it is - you shouldn't need a chart to figure out all the familial relationships, because then the show becomes a daytime soap opera.
Plus, I like Henry, senior. I want that to be Regina's real father, and find out more about how Cora and he got together (no doubt he was some rich, hapless duke or baron that she married for his money).
What would work...is a sort of modern take on the Rumplestilskin fairy tale. Isn't Cora a Miller's daughter? Because in the original tale of Rumplestilskin - the heroine/protagonist is the Miller's daughter whose father makes a deal with Rumplestilskin - so his daughter can marry the King or Duke or ruler of the village. The Duke is broke and needs money, so he has to marry a rich wife. The Miller states that his daughter can weave gold from thread. Rumplestilskin agrees to do it for her - or teach her how, one or the other (can't remember which) in exchange for her first born child. She can only get out of it by guessing his real name. She does, he disappears in poof of smoke, she gets the baby.
The Cora/Rumple story sounds similar. The irony would be that Cora is now trying to take Rumple's grandchild for her daughter. That is a nice twist. But making the kid (Henry) related to Cora is taking it a bit too far.
Not to mention if Regina is in that family tree by biology and then continues to get side-lined by everyone so that she lashes out in angrymagic!OMG it's Morgana revisited and *snore* [no season 5 spoilers if you take this Merlin reference and run with it, plz]
I thought you were ahead of me on S5? I have four episodes to go, Syfy took a break damn them. Also they took the last five minutes off the last episode due to Wrestling going on too long prior.
Anyhow, no worries - I could go on a run without ever mentioning S5. I'm not happy with how the story handled Morgana, who is starting to remind me a bit too much of Wile E. Coyote with Arthur as the Road Runner.
Agree on Regina...I thought they were redeeming her this season? Do we really have to go back to Angry!Magic Regina? She's not as interesting a character. I found the character struggling with her desire to use magic to fix things far more interesting. The whole lashes out in angry!magic routine is repetitive and gets boring fast, it also reduces the character to a cartoon villain, a la Morgana. (Although I will state Morgana is slightly more interesting in S5...) And yes, snore or yawn is right. Bored now.
I don't think that's the route they plan on going though. I'm almost positive that the end game will be Regina turning on her mother - and killing her mother to save Henry, which is a rather interesting twist on the whole kill the father to save the son motif. While Rumple may be forced to make the same choice he made with Bae, again with Henry - give up magic. Henry appears to the core of the series or the central catalyste/wild card. He's what brought Emma to Storybrook, and he's what is bringing Bae back to Storybrook and to Rumple. He's also, I think, the source of both Regina and Rumple's redemption. Keep in mind that Rumple or rather Mr. Gold arranged for Regina to adopt Henry.
Henry who is named after her father - who Regina sacrificed in order to create the curse.
Henry is also how the curse got broken. Emma kissing Henry broke the curse. And Henry was the key to how they managed to get Snow and Emma out of FTL and back to Storybrook. And Henry's the reason they ended up there - protecting Regina from the wraith.
If you look at the story as being told through Henry or his gaze...
and his relationships are the central core of the series.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 09:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 10:24 pm (UTC)Don't you hate being nervous about it, though? When you get excited about a show and fearful of it tumbling downhill, 'cause been there before. When Good Writers Go Bad, next on Animal Planet!
Cora *is* the miller's daughter (that's why Regina and Henry, Jr are last named "Mills"). There's an upcoming episode called "the Miller's Daughter," that I'm hoping is about Cora and Rumplestiltskin striking a deal where he helps her marry rich!Henry, Sr, and she in return promises her first born of that marriage to Rumple, in effect handing Regina over to Rumple to do with as he will--cementing Regina's fate, but Rumple is not her biological father.
Yes, I like our scenario better. It's dark and twisted and full of ironies, but not incestuous.
And bonus if Cora diez or is exiled back to Wonderland.... this season.... I do like Barbara Hershey, but her character is a little two-dimensional and *another* redemption story would get in the way of Regina's. [that's horrible of me to say]
I am liking the idea of Henry, Jr being a savior, like Emma. I have a(nother!) story kink for Messiah storylines, part of the reason I like Emma so much.
But I hope they don't use that to have him upstage Emma at some point. Part of what makes Henry endearing is that he enjoys (in fact, yearns to be) being part of a family, and wants to be a hero because his family have heroic qualities. But I don't see him as the point-of-view character in this narrative. I still think it's Emma. She's the "Character of Invitation," the character who stands in for the audience, enters the strange world of Storybrooke, and has to have all this weird stuff explained to her by insiders, most especially Henry, then goes through the hero's journey.
I'm not invested as you in Regina's redemption. I do think her struggling between redemption and evil is a more interesting place to be. If she crossed to one side of that fence or the other, she wouldn't be as interesting (to me). Although they can't keep her static forever, I suppose.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 10:29 pm (UTC)So far, this show is giving me happies on multiple levels. Which always makes me nervous....
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 11:19 pm (UTC)Sigh. Yes. It's the only reason I hunt down spoilers. I can see where the thread should go, but I know tv writers are wonky and won't necessarily do that or they'll got the trite/run of the mill direction.
Why do you think I tortured myself on the Buffy Cross and Stake and Angel's Soul Spoiler Boards back in the day?
And for ONCE? I did the same thing - hunted spoilers for Neil/Emma, because I was worried they'd go the typical route of having Neil show up in Storybrook while Emma is hunting Bae (aka Neil) in Manhattan - which would have annoyed me to no end. Or worse not having Neil be Bae.
Yes, I like our scenario better. It's dark and twisted and full of ironies, but not incestuous.
Agreed. Subtle is far better than over-the-top. If its incestuous, it just becomes silly and a parody of itself. I'm hoping you are right that the writer's having Snow/Charming attempt to explain the familial relationships to each other...demonstrates awareness. I think they are aware - because they are online and to a degree interacting with the fandom.
But I hope they don't use that to have him upstage Emma at some point. Part of what makes Henry endearing is that he enjoys (in fact, yearns to be) being part of a family, and wants to be a hero because his family have heroic qualities. But I don't see him as the point-of-view character in this narrative. I still think it's Emma. She's the "Character of Invitation,"
Agreed. I think it would be a huge mistake to shift the pov from Emma to Henry. I didn't state what I meant regarding Henry well - I see him more as a sort of catalyste character...who makes things happen.
A wild-card. Not a trickster. Just a catalyste. But I think Emma is really the central character and needs to remain it. I like having a female character as both the hero of the piece and central pov and portrayed in a way that goes against traditional gender stereotypes (ie. she's not girly like Belle). If they took her out and made it all about Henry, I think I'd jump ship. I like him as being more peripheral - or a catalyste for Emma.
I'm not invested as you in Regina's redemption.
I'm not really invested in it. I just don't want her to stay static or be bwahaha evil. In short I don't want Morgana. I want complicated and ambiguous. I don't want Rumple to be redeemed either - so much as left ambiguous. Ambiguous characters are more interesting.
I should clarify something - I was never really invested in Angel or Spike's redemption - I just wanted the characters to evolve, grow and become multi-faceated. The problem with tv shows is if the characters stay villains - they have no where to go. But if they are too good, they become dull as toast. For some reason writing a multi-faceted ambiguous character who can be evil one day and good the next is beyond some writers? I tend to prefer the characters that are like that - it's more realistic and far more interesting and less predictable.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 11:22 pm (UTC)Hey, my mental health is fragile as it is; do you think I'm an emotional masochist? (Oh, wait...I AM an emotional masochist. Nevah mind.)
BTW - AtPO?
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 11:35 pm (UTC)ATPO = All Things Philosophical About BTVS and Angel. Go here:
http://www.atpobtvs.com/
Hit archives - search by date. There it is. It's actually pretty sane, few skirmishes. You see more on livejournal. Heck I've had worse ones on my own livejournal. The board was good at policing itself.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 11:37 pm (UTC)Reluctant heros and messiahs...sigh.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 11:43 pm (UTC)Did you see my LJ entry about Henry being the Guide character (http://infinitedoorways.com/2013/01/24/once-upon-a-time-on-henry/#more-8154), re: the Hero's Journey, with Emma as the Hero? (that's a link to the polished version of it in my writer's journal). Granted, that was more his role in season 1, to lead Emma to Storybrooke and spend the rest of the season
hitting her over the head with the Fairytale bookmaking sure she fulfilled her role as savior, and providing most of the exposition.This season is allowing him to have the beginnings of a hero's journey for himself, and face challenges to his childish fairy-tale view of the world, which is good.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 11:45 pm (UTC)I am, though, writing an essay about the phenomenon of story kinks.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-03 11:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-04 12:27 am (UTC)Oh, as an aside, how many times have you watched the episode Manhattan now? I'm on my fourth watching. LOL!. I adore it.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-04 12:34 am (UTC)Also, I'd rather not be spoiled on the series either for that matter. Spoilers ruined my viewing of Buffy and Angel. I think I would have enjoyed it better if I hadn't been on the spoiler boards. But I was worried ...and unfortunately they did exactly what I was worried they would do. Oh well. Lesson learned. I only do it with daytime soap opera General Hospital - because those shows are impossible to get reliable spoilers on, they change the story on a dime.
Hmm..no didn't see the post about Henry as Guide character - that's actually an interesting idea. It makes a lot of sense and fits the Manhattan episode - he's not just Emma's guide but also Rumple's.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-04 01:45 am (UTC)I just got done watching the next episode. New highs and new obstacles. And more to angst about.
...cause of, the fun!
no subject
Date: 2013-03-04 01:49 am (UTC)And then watching them work their way out of it.
no subject
Date: 2013-03-05 04:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-06 09:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-03-09 08:40 pm (UTC)The moment that encapsulated their dynamic for me was in "The Peacekeeper Wars", when Aeryn and Crichton were pinned down in combat while Aeryn was in labor (thanks to Crichton's unaltered human DNA, Peacekeepers having been bioengineered to make birth a much quicker process), and in response to Crichton wanting Aeryn to stay out of the fight, she replied honestly, "But shooting makes me feel better!" (or words to that effect).
I loved them both so much in that moment. :)
no subject
Date: 2013-03-11 11:54 pm (UTC)Exactly.
Never romantically ship a pairing on a Whedon series. Whedon is not a romance writer.
I know people who are still reading the comics and impatiently waiting for Buffy to say "I love you" to Spike, which - ain't gonna happen, kids, or at least not unironically. (And the more folks want it to happen the more I suspect it won't - I think Joss delights in "playing" his audience, hence the spacefrak. "look how silly your romantic notions are. Is this what you want?")
no subject
Date: 2013-03-11 11:58 pm (UTC)Heh, I've already gotten a little of that on LJ, and I'm sure that's just a shadow of it. All I have to do is mention "Spike" on a post and away we go.