What Happens vs How It's Done
I've had this post simmering for a while. I've noticed an interesting distinction in fannish opinion and discussion along the lines of the Doylian vs Watsonian divide of viewpoints. I guess this all crystallized in reading the comments to my episode polls. I've come to grok that there's another division of viewpoint among fans. I'm lacking in terms and I'm not feeling very creative, so let me just make it simple and call this the What Happens vs the How It's Done division.
What Happens is when fans look at...what happens. This probably describes my first viewing of the show. I didn't much care about the execution or anything. It was just a pretty basic "what happens next" mentality. This also includes things like characterization and plot development, though, so it's not all surface-y stuff.
How It's Done is the more nitpicky of the two. It factors in the quality of the writing, the execution of the plot, etc. It usually encompasses a Doylian perspective as far as what might have been intended and how successful it was.
Let's give an example from the series to illustrate what I'm talking about.
This is just my opinion on this one, but I don't think it's entirely uncommon. In looking at The Gift and Chosen, I think The Gift is the superior episode just in terms of How It's Done. The execution is superb. The writing is top-notch. The plot is fab. It's just beautiful. Chosen, however, is the better ending for the series as far as What Happens. It may falter next to The Gift in How It's Done, but the narrative of Buffy sharing her power is a better What Happens for the end of the series. Feel free to disagree with me, but not in this post. The post isn't about the example. Don't get sidetracked!
Just looking at my own thoughts on the series, I find I'm rarely bothered by What Happens. In fact, the only major thing off the top of my head that bugs me from that category is the AR in Seeing Red (though I also have issues with How It's Done). I wonder if people who watched as it aired may be more prone to be bothered by What Happens, just because there's more time to speculate and get attached to fan theories as to what might happen next (so the canon events may seem unsatisfying).
Of course, this isn't a simple binary. It's not like there's a group of What Happens fans and a group of How It's Done fans. That's silly. However, like the Doylian vs Watsonian distinction, this provides a couple different perspectives for viewing and discussing the show. And I often see discussions falter because of a conflict in perspectives. Some fans may prioritize one viewpoint over the other (sometimes at different times). If one fan is just looking at What Happens, and the other one is talking about How It's Done, they're not gonna be talking about the same thing. It's mass chaos! *waves hands*
Anyway, since I began to formulate this idea, I've found it interesting to read discussions on the series to see how they fall into these perspectives. Oftentimes, people that are unhappy with What Happens attempt to justify that unhappiness by critiquing How It's Done. I know I've done that. I initially wasn't happy with the Willow/Xander-ness of S3. I just didn't like the development, plain and simple. I tried to use How It's Done arguments to explain why, but really, I've come to realize that I just didn't like it. I didn't like What Happened. It's a thing.
Not to say that a person can't dislike What Happens because of How It's Done (AYW, anybody?). There's no hard and fast constant on this. It's a whole mess of interacting perspectives and opinions and dynamics of how arguments are phrased. It's fascinating to nerds like me.
That all being said, I just wanted to throw it out there so like-minded nerds could chew on it and see what they think. :)
What Happens is when fans look at...what happens. This probably describes my first viewing of the show. I didn't much care about the execution or anything. It was just a pretty basic "what happens next" mentality. This also includes things like characterization and plot development, though, so it's not all surface-y stuff.
How It's Done is the more nitpicky of the two. It factors in the quality of the writing, the execution of the plot, etc. It usually encompasses a Doylian perspective as far as what might have been intended and how successful it was.
Let's give an example from the series to illustrate what I'm talking about.
This is just my opinion on this one, but I don't think it's entirely uncommon. In looking at The Gift and Chosen, I think The Gift is the superior episode just in terms of How It's Done. The execution is superb. The writing is top-notch. The plot is fab. It's just beautiful. Chosen, however, is the better ending for the series as far as What Happens. It may falter next to The Gift in How It's Done, but the narrative of Buffy sharing her power is a better What Happens for the end of the series. Feel free to disagree with me, but not in this post. The post isn't about the example. Don't get sidetracked!
Just looking at my own thoughts on the series, I find I'm rarely bothered by What Happens. In fact, the only major thing off the top of my head that bugs me from that category is the AR in Seeing Red (though I also have issues with How It's Done). I wonder if people who watched as it aired may be more prone to be bothered by What Happens, just because there's more time to speculate and get attached to fan theories as to what might happen next (so the canon events may seem unsatisfying).
Of course, this isn't a simple binary. It's not like there's a group of What Happens fans and a group of How It's Done fans. That's silly. However, like the Doylian vs Watsonian distinction, this provides a couple different perspectives for viewing and discussing the show. And I often see discussions falter because of a conflict in perspectives. Some fans may prioritize one viewpoint over the other (sometimes at different times). If one fan is just looking at What Happens, and the other one is talking about How It's Done, they're not gonna be talking about the same thing. It's mass chaos! *waves hands*
Anyway, since I began to formulate this idea, I've found it interesting to read discussions on the series to see how they fall into these perspectives. Oftentimes, people that are unhappy with What Happens attempt to justify that unhappiness by critiquing How It's Done. I know I've done that. I initially wasn't happy with the Willow/Xander-ness of S3. I just didn't like the development, plain and simple. I tried to use How It's Done arguments to explain why, but really, I've come to realize that I just didn't like it. I didn't like What Happened. It's a thing.
Not to say that a person can't dislike What Happens because of How It's Done (AYW, anybody?). There's no hard and fast constant on this. It's a whole mess of interacting perspectives and opinions and dynamics of how arguments are phrased. It's fascinating to nerds like me.
That all being said, I just wanted to throw it out there so like-minded nerds could chew on it and see what they think. :)