I'm perfectly calm, really...
Truth in both fiction and discussion of fiction AKA, why the premise of Ashes to Ashes doesn't work.
(aka, even though I know I'm being a wanker, well, I've started now so I may as well continue and crest over the climax)
So, once again, I am angry at essentially getting my own way.
I can see how that would be frustrating.
But let's break it down into its component parts.
-By 'killing Sam off', the slap in the face is threefold -
a) fans who decided to actively remix canon and dwell in the '1973 was real in some way' camp lose their protagonist again, and this time, sorry to say, it really is for good. Because if you think JS is going to make a guest appearance, you are dreaming. This obviously doesn't preclude the writers from hinting that the character reappears, but that's not going to be remotely satisfying.
b) fans who had accepted that Sam created his own coma world and that the characters in it were representations of his psyche, who decided to actively remix canon and dwell in the '1973 may not have been real, but it was real to me' camp lose their protagonist again, and this time, sorry to say, it's likely he'll be mentioned once or twice and then faded into the background as if he never existed in the first place. This is now Alex's story in an independent unreal world and this negates Sam's importance as a character.
c) there is obvious and cynical manipulation regarding audience expectation. "You see, it's so smart, because the Sam fangirls will follow along with us, just for the potential to catch a glimpse, even though we all know we can't give them that. " After telling fandom, in no uncertain terms 'OH HAI GUIZ, SAM TYLER'S DEAD!' we get 'ACTILLY HE'S TOTTL NOT, LOL!'.
But, Loz, you have complained rampantly about the fact the series didn't end with the revelation that '1973 is real (in some way)'. And now they're saying it is! This is a Good Thing, surely?
-If it fit with what they gave us in text, yes.
-If it fit with what they told us about text, yes.
-If it had been handled with subtlety and and a semblance of sense, yes.
It doesn't fit. They've employed retroactive continuity in relation to an unreal world to squash it in there. So, I've lost Sam again. I've lost Sam and Annie again. I've lost Sam and Gene again. And whilst I've already said I'm going to actively remix canon and play it as Alex coming up with her own fable to explain it to herself - (an implicit 'Sam has his world', 'Alex has her world') - I shouldn't have to. I shouldn't be having to do all the work to make what they've done gel with what's gone before.
Am I overreacting? Yes, of course I am. But at least I'm being truthful about this. I'm not saying any old thing just to produce a response. What's the point of getting angry over fiction? Well, the point is that fiction matters - it's how we connect worldwide. We share our stories and we give parts of ourselves in the process. And some of it is just silly mindless crap, but it bills itself as such and we enjoy it and it's all well and good. But some of it is aspiring to say something quite interesting based in truth and we enjoy it and we think and it's all well and great. Why spend that much money, have such high production values for something that's got no brain, heart or soul?
Because, if they don't care enough about the characters and the narrative - why should we?
(aka, even though I know I'm being a wanker, well, I've started now so I may as well continue and crest over the climax)
So, once again, I am angry at essentially getting my own way.
I can see how that would be frustrating.
But let's break it down into its component parts.
-By 'killing Sam off', the slap in the face is threefold -
a) fans who decided to actively remix canon and dwell in the '1973 was real in some way' camp lose their protagonist again, and this time, sorry to say, it really is for good. Because if you think JS is going to make a guest appearance, you are dreaming. This obviously doesn't preclude the writers from hinting that the character reappears, but that's not going to be remotely satisfying.
b) fans who had accepted that Sam created his own coma world and that the characters in it were representations of his psyche, who decided to actively remix canon and dwell in the '1973 may not have been real, but it was real to me' camp lose their protagonist again, and this time, sorry to say, it's likely he'll be mentioned once or twice and then faded into the background as if he never existed in the first place. This is now Alex's story in an independent unreal world and this negates Sam's importance as a character.
c) there is obvious and cynical manipulation regarding audience expectation. "You see, it's so smart, because the Sam fangirls will follow along with us, just for the potential to catch a glimpse, even though we all know we can't give them that. " After telling fandom, in no uncertain terms 'OH HAI GUIZ, SAM TYLER'S DEAD!' we get 'ACTILLY HE'S TOTTL NOT, LOL!'.
But, Loz, you have complained rampantly about the fact the series didn't end with the revelation that '1973 is real (in some way)'. And now they're saying it is! This is a Good Thing, surely?
-If it fit with what they gave us in text, yes.
-If it fit with what they told us about text, yes.
-If it had been handled with subtlety and and a semblance of sense, yes.
It doesn't fit. They've employed retroactive continuity in relation to an unreal world to squash it in there. So, I've lost Sam again. I've lost Sam and Annie again. I've lost Sam and Gene again. And whilst I've already said I'm going to actively remix canon and play it as Alex coming up with her own fable to explain it to herself - (an implicit 'Sam has his world', 'Alex has her world') - I shouldn't have to. I shouldn't be having to do all the work to make what they've done gel with what's gone before.
Am I overreacting? Yes, of course I am. But at least I'm being truthful about this. I'm not saying any old thing just to produce a response. What's the point of getting angry over fiction? Well, the point is that fiction matters - it's how we connect worldwide. We share our stories and we give parts of ourselves in the process. And some of it is just silly mindless crap, but it bills itself as such and we enjoy it and it's all well and good. But some of it is aspiring to say something quite interesting based in truth and we enjoy it and we think and it's all well and great. Why spend that much money, have such high production values for something that's got no brain, heart or soul?
Because, if they don't care enough about the characters and the narrative - why should we?