One of my buttons got pushed at Writercon - the reputed Whedon quote (now apparently echoed by RTD) that he doesn't give the audience what it wants, he gives it what it needs
( Read more... )
And the quote misses the point and puts the emphasis in the wrong place. What a good writer does is not what the audience wants or needs, but what the story wants or needs.
And just as a storyteller must come to terms with that, so must the audience accept that not every story is going to be told their way. And that's life, so STFU about it. If you don't like it, go tell your own bloody stories. Abusing people like RTD and Whedon and whoever for betraying them by not telling the story in a way that matches the one running inside their heads will not ever endear them to storytellers. Don't get me wrong, I'm not interested in wankery from storytellers. But I'm getting mighty, mighty tired of the fannish entitlement out there. It's equal opportunity wankerism and it's bloody tedious.
And that's life, so STFU about it. If you don't like it, go tell your own bloody stories
Fandom, I type wryly, does.
While I agree that there's a horrific amount of fannish entitlement, I'm not going to agree that all objections to a story are nothing but entitlement. I don't think that the audience has to STFU about not liking, for direct examples, racism, sexism, or even extreme violence. Or overuse of plot devices, come to think of it.
And maybe we do need a story, but maybe we've had a really bad day (or week, or year) and need a story that, right there on the package, is heavily advertised as fluffy brain candy.
They don't know what I need on a given day. But I know not to go near a product made by either one ever again.
and need a story that, right there on the package, is heavily advertised as fluffy brain candy.
As long as it IS what is advertised on the package. To drag the example away from TV and to books, I picked one for review because it was advertised as "psychological horror."
I LOVE mind-fuck stories! Sixth Sense, The Others - the Others was fab; not one drop of blood and it just about made me wet myself when a door slammed.
That'll lower a review right of the top: bad labelling.
I mentioned something of the ilk. It didn't help... well, it helped *me* - that the author, in an attempt to up the scare quotient, actually had a little advert on Amazon saying "Don't buy this book. It's too scary."
I quoted that, and pointed out he was half right.
ETA: And Torchwood was the action-packed but cheesy show where we see half-robot pole dancers fight dinosaurs, not little kids get slowly murdered onscreen.
I think it's important for writers to be interested in telling good stories effectively, and generally being willing to push the envelope on a lot of things, because you never know what type of entertainment or fictions you might want or 'need' or enjoy or just generally get something out of until you have the option of viewing it. Having said that, I think that there's a world of difference between that and the idea that the writer is there as an elite figure to condescendingly explain to the masses what it is that they 'need'... I like a lot of both JW's and RTD's work; not so keen on the whole patronizing, self-serving personae that comes across in interviews...mostly I just try to separate the good product from the hooplehead creator and leave it at that. (Why does everyone seem to think that Joss Whedon is God? Why? The man's written some really fun, above average television, and is certainly influential in terms of the impact of his work, but I'm just not feeling the love here.)
mostly I just try to separate the good product from the hooplehead creator and leave it at that.
So far I've been able to do that with Moffat, because he says some horrible things in interviews - so horrible that I handwave them as punching buttons for the hell of it - but I am consistently entertained by his work.
The minute I'm not entertained by my entertainment, particularly if it's in what I feel is bait-and-switch, I'm going to speak the hell up.
Why does everyone seem to think that Joss Whedon is God? Why?
Buffy was amazingly influential. I think the reputation is still flying from that.
Oh, God, I was trying to parse exactly why that line bugged the hell out of me (in something other than a “how fucking dare you tell me what I need?” sort of way), and you're right, that's what it is.
Once again, I want to tell them it's hard for me to interrogate the text from the wrong perspective when I'm interrogating the text from MY perspective, and there's nothing wrong with that. TY Anne Rice, for that bit of phrasing that will no longer mean anything but “wanky author.”
it's hard for me to interrogate the text from the wrong perspective when I'm interrogating the text from MY perspective
Amen!
ETA: Of all the wanky author/producer rants, Rice still wins. RTD and Whedon are at least vaguely bringing story needs back into it, Hamilton points out the truth that sales are booming - but Rice went on and on and on about how it was impossible to even consider disliking her golden prose.
I'm with you on this. The author has the right to tell the story the way sie wants, and I have the right to say, "I don't like this because X" -- but if X doesn't change, my options are limited to voting with my eyes/purse and not buying or watching the story any more.
And yeah, I still get het up about what they did to Bones, but at the end of the day... it's JUST A TV SHOW, and I can certainly live without it.
Yeah - my reaction to Bones was pretty much "stick a fork in me, I'm done" and moving on. Had it not been for Day 5 of Torchwood, I probably would have just said "well, that sucks" and kept watching, even.
Comments 32
Reply
But at the same time, not all stories are going to suit all audiences, and insulting the audience isn't going to make that go away. Or shut 'em up.
Reply
Reply
Fandom, I type wryly, does.
While I agree that there's a horrific amount of fannish entitlement, I'm not going to agree that all objections to a story are nothing but entitlement. I don't think that the audience has to STFU about not liking, for direct examples, racism, sexism, or even extreme violence. Or overuse of plot devices, come to think of it.
Reply
And maybe we do need a story, but maybe we've had a really bad day (or week, or year) and need a story that, right there on the package, is heavily advertised as fluffy brain candy.
They don't know what I need on a given day. But I know not to go near a product made by either one ever again.
Reply
As long as it IS what is advertised on the package. To drag the example away from TV and to books, I picked one for review because it was advertised as "psychological horror."
I LOVE mind-fuck stories! Sixth Sense, The Others - the Others was fab; not one drop of blood and it just about made me wet myself when a door slammed.
What was the book actually about?
Torture porn.
Reply
Back to TV? It was called "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," not "Waiting for Godot," or "Depressing Longass Russian Novel." FFS.
Reply
I mentioned something of the ilk. It didn't help... well, it helped *me* - that the author, in an attempt to up the scare quotient, actually had a little advert on Amazon saying "Don't buy this book. It's too scary."
I quoted that, and pointed out he was half right.
ETA: And Torchwood was the action-packed but cheesy show where we see half-robot pole dancers fight dinosaurs, not little kids get slowly murdered onscreen.
Reply
I like a lot of both JW's and RTD's work; not so keen on the whole patronizing, self-serving personae that comes across in interviews...mostly I just try to separate the good product from the hooplehead creator and leave it at that. (Why does everyone seem to think that Joss Whedon is God? Why? The man's written some really fun, above average television, and is certainly influential in terms of the impact of his work, but I'm just not feeling the love here.)
Reply
So far I've been able to do that with Moffat, because he says some horrible things in interviews - so horrible that I handwave them as punching buttons for the hell of it - but I am consistently entertained by his work.
The minute I'm not entertained by my entertainment, particularly if it's in what I feel is bait-and-switch, I'm going to speak the hell up.
Why does everyone seem to think that Joss Whedon is God? Why?
Buffy was amazingly influential. I think the reputation is still flying from that.
Reply
Once again, I want to tell them it's hard for me to interrogate the text from the wrong perspective when I'm interrogating the text from MY perspective, and there's nothing wrong with that. TY Anne Rice, for that bit of phrasing that will no longer mean anything but “wanky author.”
Reply
Amen!
ETA: Of all the wanky author/producer rants, Rice still wins. RTD and Whedon are at least vaguely bringing story needs back into it, Hamilton points out the truth that sales are booming - but Rice went on and on and on about how it was impossible to even consider disliking her golden prose.
Reply
And yeah, I still get het up about what they did to Bones, but at the end of the day... it's JUST A TV SHOW, and I can certainly live without it.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment