{ the resurrection of fandom }
Sep. 5th, 2005 09:08 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
delgaEdit: There are explicit Spooks, S4 spoilers in the post below.
So, after much to-ing and fro-ing, a once cancelled trip to Hunstanton is back on - just me and Esme. It should be a good day; I'm looking forward to getting away from The Village (dude, are we even a village anymore? But can I really call it town when every urban area within a ten mile radius is town?) It also means I don't have to plan things to do next Tuesday, so yay.
Still haven't heard from the university re:accommodation/term dates. Am nervous and am emailing because my nerves? Mondo, mondo frazzled. In order to deal with this, am concentrating on fact that Spooks is back a week today. I'm actually pretty interested in how they're going to play out Fiona's death on Tuesday. At least, I think it'll be Tuesday's episode; she only filmed a couple. I may look on Sosnovka's website for news on her pregnancy and see if there's more Spooks information there. I'm not just excited about this in terms of plot - I'm also pretty excited about the fanfic opportunities this will hopefully raise. It's no secret that the inkwell's been fairly dry recently and that writing hasn;t been coming easily. Post-eps are a great method of writing for fanfic writers, I think, because of the sense of immediacy and the strong canonical links. Last year, I made three ventures into canon and then jumped off the bandwagon (um, that might be flist locked), somewhat. It's the most fanfic I've written for a single fandom, ever. In fact, it's the first fandom I've written for since I wrote a very, very bad Tribe fic (which featured some shockingly awful Mary Sues - yes, plural - and a convoluted religious angle that was very difficult to explain). Since then, I've written drabbles, ficlets and two of three-part fic concerning Don Eppes. A fic that I am incapable of finishing. So, hopefully, with the new series, I'll be able to get back into it.
The problem, as I have tried to explain to three people today, is that I don't watch TV just for entertainment anymore, at leats, not in the way that I used to watch it. Before, I could watch a show and just enjoy the story. Now I look for consistency in plot and characterisation, skill of writing, skill of performance and direction. I worry about how shallow characters are or how ridiculous plots are. With Spooks I don't bother with most of these things; I sit there and get suckered in by the stories. It's a nice change.
For the past four weeks, I've been trying to write a multi-fandom/meta post about characterisation and the evolution thereof. I'm still not quite there but I do want to write it. In that vein, d'y'all think you could answer some questions for me?
- Do you watch shows for character interactions or intricate plotlines?
- Have you ever been a fan of a character who underwent a massive overhaul over the course of a series?
- If yes, how did you feel about that change?
- Do you think characters should change over time or should they stay true to the form in which they first appeared?
I suspect that most of my issues with characterisation come from the fact that I watch procedural dramas and get annoyed when they enter the realm of soap opera. I know a lot of people watch these shows for the character stuff; I used to watch CSI and wait for the very Sar-centric episodes. But in the past year, since my focus has changed with regards to tv itself, I find myself approaching my fandoms in a different way.
OK, enough of that for now. Comment, let me know what you think to the above questions. Go off on a tangent. I'd like to know what people think. Oh, and I'm leaving this post public. Pimp out the questions - here or in your own journals. I'm looking forward to a substantial report and hopefully some debate, especially because I don't think people talk enough about the bones of fandom. (And I'm such a comment-whore).
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 12:18 am (UTC)Have you ever been a fan of a character who underwent a massive overhaul over the course of a series? I guess Spike counts here, in Buffy? Making him a good guy? I won't mention Sark as I don't believe his "epiphany" in season 4 was anything other than pragmatism (by the show's producers as much as the character)
If yes, how did you feel about that change? I loved it, actually. It helped that the character resisted the change for so long. It helped that James Marsters was equal to the acting challenge. And the show was careful to keep the "change" ever so slightly ironic and quirky.
Do you think characters should change over time or should they stay true to the form in which they first appeared? Depends. I'd hate to see House have an epiphany because so much of my enjoyment comes from his acerbity (and anyway they've hinted enough at the 'human' under the mask - we know he's not as hard as he pretends to be and it allows us a frisson when other characters persist in misreading him). On the other hand, Spike HAD to change because it made sense in the story arc of such a long-running series. In a way, we all want 'development', progress in shows of any length. But not at the cost of the magic formula that makes us love the shows/characters.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 06:30 am (UTC)that would depend on the show. stargate atlantis i watch mainly for the character interactions (the plots drive me nuts with all the holes and improbabilities and star-trekkiness), with buffy in the early days it was both, so it is with numb3rs, x files in the early days was mostly about the plot lines, due south character interactions, etc etc.
Have you ever been a fan of a character who underwent a massive overhaul over the course of a series?
wesley from angel the series instantly springs to mind.
If yes, how did you feel about that change?
i loved him before, i loved him during, i loved him after. i loved the fact that he changed and i loved what stayed the same. i sort of didn't like some of the late s5 wesley aspects but that's just nit-picking. i thought it was all very well done, how they managed to retain what made him wesley and yet change him so much.
Do you think characters should change over time or should they stay true to the form in which they first appeared?
i guess that depends on the character, whether i consider it a change for better or for worse, the nature of the change and the cause of the change. i really didn't like what they made of xf's scully. i loved s1 angel and s1 cordelia but s5 angel and s3/4 cordy inspire mostly the barf. in both their cases the change in character has a valid reason (result of their experiences), but it just made them so much duller and annoying. sometimes it's more annoying when characters should change (considering what they've been through) and they just stay the same.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 06:58 am (UTC)Poke me if I haven't said something sensible on the subject by... Thursday, okay?
Fandom? Make that FUNdom. Or... not.
Date: 2005-09-06 05:47 pm (UTC)Oh yes, all the time. One of the main reasons I watch my shows so... erm, religiously... is because I love character development. I love it. And, sometimes, even when people don’t think the character development as being very good I still love it, simply because anytime you get to see a character living and breathing is (to me, anyway) character development.
On the subject of plotlines, that’s part of why I was such an Alias fan (I say was simply because there was a point at which I just sort of stopped watching, and it had lost my interest... simply because it *lost* its intricate plotlines). What really drove the show in its early season was the insane Rambalidi crap that the writers kept pulling. If you missed even one episode, you were lost. There was always some device they found and needed and meant the the Prophecy was true and then wasn’t and then Sydney and Vaughn made out but he was married and then Sloane is Slaone but not Sloane... and, of course, that all makes no sense. But I love that.
Have you ever been a fan of a character who underwent a massive overhaul over the course of a series?
Mmm, maybe. I suppose I could urge you to define ‘overhaul’. And, to that end, ‘massive’. I suppose Sark counts (Alias, again), but I just can’t stand this nice guy/ trustworthy/remorse thing they keep pushing. He’s a bloody terrorist. Hot, but a terrorist. He kills people and betrays people for a living, and you expect us to believe that he’d be whimpering over the body of a ‘woman he loved’? Uh, no. Sorry writers, no can do.
If yes, how did you feel about that change?
Erm, see above. I suppose I answered that already, eh? *sheepish grin*
Do you think characters should change over time or should they stay true to the form in which they first appeared?
I think change is interesting, but totally different personalities are not. In reality, most people (even after traumatic events or whatever) really don’t change all that much over the course of a few years. Even the longest running shows-- the ones that were the most successful had characters that more or less stayed true to their original substance, with more (or, perhaps, less) maturity than they started with and a little more mileage. Think Friends and Fraiser (the letter F must be magic or something). Even though the characters went through a lot, they kept their (large) audience and the characters were still identifiable from the pilot of the show up until the final episode. I think C.S.I., too, has more or less done that. I’m interested in what they do with this new season (given everything that happened in the finale of the previous one). Hopefully the writers won’t have the urge to morph the characters beyond recognition... but I do expect a change. There are things that, inevitably, *will* bring about change.
Because change happens.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 06:38 pm (UTC)More for characters that I'm interested in. I like some plot. But IMO it's possible to have *too much* plot. Which seems to be a common hazard on TV these days. Every producer wants to hook people into their show, so every single episode has to be this deep-dark-chocolate mess of plottiness, enough to make you sick to your stomach. Excessively plotty, overdone and crammed into too-small a container.
That "excess of plot" also makes it very difficult for a new viewer to jump in in the middle of the series. That's frustrating because I so rarely watch anything from the beginning. I have given up on certain fandoms that seemed intriguing initially but had so much canon to learn that it seemed hopeless to try to catch up.
>>Have you ever been a fan of a character who underwent a massive overhaul over the course of a series?<<
Hmmm...all depends onwhat you mean by "overhaul." Effective, intriguing character development is good; that's the beef in the burger, for me. But selling out on the very attributes that made the character distinctive and interesting in the first place? Boo. Esp when it feels like the sellout was driven by some dumbass "marketing" decision to make the show "more appealing" to a certain fan base (which always seems to be 18-24 hr old males).
>>If yes, how did you feel about that change?<<
See answer above.
>>Do you think characters should change over time or should they stay true to the form in which they first appeared?<<
I tend to like it when "noble" characters are tested but ultimately stay true to their values (even if they're humbled along the way), or when morally ambivalent characters eventually redeem themselves (after all the "redemption" plot is a standard in storytelling).
Of course it needs to be done in a way that seems convincing and linked to their original identity. People going through "magical" changes of heart -- uh uh. Maybe in goo-goo romance novels where people are suddenly forever changed by "twu wuv", but "sudden character transformation" is not a convincing storytelling technique.
I'm less interested when characters "fall" and become permanently and unredeemably evil. Purely evil and/or hopelessly screwed-up characters don't have much interest for me. (I avoid a lot of modern profic for that reason; fucked-up people doing endless fucked-up things, and I really can't bring myself to give a shit.)
Dunno if all this answers your questions.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 10:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 12:45 am (UTC)Oooh, character interactions, definitely. I can forgive plotlines that are dodgy, but inconsistent characterisation really bugs me. I just find it more interesting. I like dialogue, I like people talking, and tbh (and not to denigrate myself) I find some of these shows hard to follow – I’m watching tv to relax and while forensic procedures or British politics might be an integral part of the show, my brain is switched off and I end up confused.
Possibly it’s also because I prefer writing character interaction than plots. I find it a lot easier to write dialogue than to come up with a spooks-style plot.
• Have you ever been a fan of a character who underwent a massive overhaul over the course of a series?
I don’t think so, because I’m not counting Adam’s mid-season blip, because that righted itself, I think.
Oh, then again there was Honey Harman becoming totally stupid on The Bill recently, but that’s not so much fandom as ‘a show I like’.
• If yes, how did you feel about that change?
If we’re talking about Honey, it made me shout at the tv. However, this is not hard.
Do you think characters should change over time or should they stay true to the form in which they first appeared?
It depends on what happens to them – if they’re in a long running drama or soap, bad shit probably will happen and it’s unrealistic to expect them to stay the same (for example, stuff happened to Ruth 305-307, 310 she indicates she’s not coping very well).
I suspect that most of my issues with characterisation come from the fact that I watch procedural dramas and get annoyed when they enter the realm of soap opera.
>>> I think I’ve started to enjoy that side of it – if you can’t beat them, join them.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 12:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-07 10:23 am (UTC)Is it Monday yet?!
no subject
Date: 2005-09-08 01:03 am (UTC)AND, NO IT'S NOT!!!!
On the other hand, Dear and I stayed up last night to watch two episodes of Lost so that helped a little. Josh Holloway gets fitter with every second he's on screen, I swear.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-08 01:05 am (UTC)*guh*
That was my only coherent response whilst watching Lost last night. I would have much prefered it if he'd beenn the one to jump Jin, though. That was the best shot, seeing Sayid fly through the air and tackle the Korean into the water. (And the slashers go crazy).
no subject
Date: 2005-09-08 01:12 am (UTC)