The Vampire Diaries: Metanarratives and the Effects of Framing in the Process of Interpretation

[youcallitwinter]

This arose from a discussion that wheatear, cranmers, and ishi_chan had on the previous 3x20 (non) reaction post, and also many other discussions on the same topic, that I just found fascinating and wanted to contribute to, and then it just turned into this horrifying thing and I cannot even with my life anymore. /fml (But then again, I’m doing a paper on text and the

Comments

[sillyforwords]

Excellent meta! I will come back and comment in more detail when I have the time. I just wanted to say one thing quickly. While the role they had Rose play in pushing the Damon/Elena side of the triangle was totally stupid, I found the Caroline part even more problematic. Because Rose was speaking to Jeremy alone and as such to us, the viewers. Almost like a Greek Chorus. She had no influence on the actions of Elena herself. So while it was heavy handed writing it is slightly forgivable. What they had Caroline do is worse because she is influencing Elena's choices here, and imposing her own view point on her. She is not just a bystander commenting on the status of her friend's relationship woes. And the decisions she is forcing on her friend are not coming organically from who she is, or her own experiences but just thrown in to serve the plot point of the day, which is why the episode was so jarring for me.

[youcallitwinter]

Haha, take all the time you want; I'm terrible at commenting on long metas because of all the time constraints!

Your point is v. interesting, I wasn't thinking of that particular angle! Both scenes are definitely problematic, and I can see why people would feel that Caroline's part was more so. But that is something that truly annoyed me about the show; that it's sort of placing the set-backs of its self-insertion onto Caroline. I mean, technically, there is no REASON why Elena shouldn't counter or why Caroline pushing for Stefan should make Elena go for Stefan. It sort of makes Elena sound like someone who can't think for herself or something; like 'hey, Caroline's asking me to get back with the guy who threatened to throw me off a bridge, so let me do it'. As much as I disliked Caroline's part in the whole thing, I'm placing the blame for that decision squarely on Elena. Or rather, not on Elena so much, as the writers ofc. They're totally writing all these arbitrary scenes to validate their own storyline and simultaneously

[waltzmatildah]

I dunno, I kinda can see it as the same thing. I mean, Rose completely shut Jeremy up. She completely invalidated his opinions and basically told him what he should feel about his sister and her completely screwed up relationship tendencies

[sillyforwords]

I get what you're saying except I would argue that Caroline has way more influence on Elenas choices than Jeremy does. But you are right, of course. They're ultimately the same thing. I think while I recognize what the writers are doing with framing, some scenes come across more manipulative than others so they bother me more. For example, the Wickery Bridge incident, and the Damon Elena scene that followed. I hated the way they had Damon have the last word, justifying Stefan's actions and totally trivializing Elena's trauma.

Lately the show has been driving me crazy by trying to argue my interpretation of a scene. I feel the writers are too in touch with the fans. It's like they read what fans have to say on twitter and forums and then they go back and hit me on the head with heavy handed dialogue to tell me why I'm wrong. As much as its nice to be able to give feedback to the writers, I sometimes wish they'd lock themselves away and just write the story they want to tell.

[youcallitwinter]

LISTEN, YOU ARE TOO SMART FOR YOUR OWN GOOD AND I BOW DOWN TO YOU.

No, seriously, I think you explored the alternate angle extremely well, and countered the stuff I said and totally convinced me of your argument. I mean, my interpretation is also just that ofc-- an interpretation. Not even close to the final word.

Now I'm frightened. I didn't think the writing of the show was that ominous lol All of your examples are so convincing. My only hope is that perhaps there are some factors in there that may be influencing the strength of/distorting the intended message this way or another?

HAHAHA, don't beeee! My analysis, though contingent upon TVD is just a general analysis of a topic that I find fascinating.

a. THAT IS AN EXCELLENT POINT. That literally never struck me. And you're absolutely right, there are bound to be discrepancies because of the number of people exploring the same characters (all of whom might have their own interpretations) just like in the Sweet Valley series or the Nancy Drew series, the structure of character

[pocochina]

OOOOH, thank you for this. It's really helpful to help me pick through my feelings. Because this:

especially in the medium of television, we tend to study various techniques of presentation within the show, of which narrative framing is an important part, as it's an externally exloyed device, and therefore functions more as a comment on the text, rather than as a part of it.

is a tough concept for me. I love narratives about fucked-up things, and sometimes bad shit happens and everyone lets it fly. And then I do totally project my judgment onto the text - like, I assumed Damon's victimization of Andie was supposed to be horrible? So I don't...know, quite, where I need there to be some textual commentary and when I don't. But particularly this season, subtlety is not a big priority for TVD, so it's a lot clearer-cut for me to expect.

The scenes could have been kept in their entirety, and gained a whole new dimension if someone had voiced their concern.

Oh, click, this.

Because what the narrative essentially does through her

[ever_neutral]

I think I'm most disturbed by this particular narrative of abuse? That it's only abuse if it's a Bad Guy doing it.

This. "Insidious" is my favourite word of the week. The text is endorsing the (objectively false) good!brother/bad!brother dichotomy through its framing of the characters. Hence, it's endorsing the idea that the trauma of victims isn't valid if the perpetrator of abuse is a Nice Guy (see: Stefan and Elena).

Kill this narrative with fire.

[upupa_epops]

I think I'm most disturbed by this particular narrative of abuse? That it's only abuse if it's a Bad Guy doing it. If he's really trying, and it was totes the drugs and the rotten friends, and he's such a good guy, and everyone just looks at them and sees the perfect couple - then this is exactly what happens, this whole silencing thing. It's so insidious and needs underlining.THIS. Because this is what really bothers me in s3? Stefan's wrong actions seem to consciously mirror Damon's wrong actions from s1&2. Murdering random, innocent people - check. Killing Jeremy / actively choosing not to save Jeremy - check. Force-feeding - check. Victimization of women with sexual undertones and just for fun - check. Verbal abuse - check. The only thing Stefan hasn't done is raping people on screen - but then, he starts the season from murdering Damon's victim to make a point, so I am not that eager to congratulate Stefan on not being a rapist at the moment... So the deeds are IDENTICAL. It took the whole season to make sure that Stefan and

[pocochina]

So the deeds are IDENTICAL. It took the whole season to make sure that Stefan and Damon are equally terrible... and yet we ended up framing S/E as romantic? Damon's abuse is addressed, Stefan's is glossed over?

I honestly really liked Stefan's story this season up until this episode, because I thought (still do think, but obviously the ball was dropped somewhere along the line) that was really purposeful that we were watching the Bad Brother take shape before our eyes. I'd argue that's an intentional theme of the season - it's also we saw with Damon when Sage showed up, and really the whole story with the Originals. The vampire myth is always on some level about corruption, about beings that are not born evil. So this kind of assertion of some innate nature just feels so out of left field.

[ever_neutral]

T H A N K Y O U

Amen to everything. You win all the literacy awards tbqh.

I just don't understand why this is even a debate. Take a literary class. Take a fucking film class. A TV show is a constructed text. It's constructed by fallible humans. The last TVD episode objectively contained zero visual/audio cues IN THE CONSTRUCTED TEXT to suggest that we were supposed to find the Stefan/Elena scenes offensive. Not in the music, acting, direction, diegetic sound, editing, props, script, dialogue, etc. etc. etc. The implied author is telling the implied audience to view the Stefan/Elena business as sweet/romantic/tragic/moving/whatever-the-fuck, and the fact that a large portion found it offensive and horrifying means that the authors have failed.

And no, you can't say "my mileage varies" because in this particular case, no ambiguity was intended by the author in question. It was presented unambiguously. This is not a matter of subjectivity

[wheatear]

Your rage is a thing of beauty tbh.

[ever_neutral]

You flatter, sir.

[upupa_epops]

I kind of want to marry this post.