oh, let me snark the ways.
1 Feb 2008 03:36 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kaigouSomedays it just doesn’t pay to actually USE the freaking braincells, or it does pay, as long as I’m willing to put up with the side effects of having to deal with skeptical responses from people who can’t seem to understand how much joy can be found in THINKING ABOUT STUFF. Because you know it just gives my life extra meaning to explore all the ramifications and connotations of a storyline, characterization, motivation, conflict and possible resolution only to have someone say, “why worry about it, just enjoy the story and see what happens.”
Ahem. When I enjoy a story, it’s because I am thinking (not “worrying”, just thinking) about it. When I stop thinking about a story, I stop enjoying it. If I close the book mid-chapter and I don’t spend the next hour saying, “hunh, I wonder what’ll happen, and I wonder if she’ll call him on that, or if they’ll get away from the tidal wave, or if they’ll lose the game,” then the book or movie or series may be a good one but it’s a failure for me personally -- because it’s a storyline I’ll never revisit. I’ll probably end up rewatching Seirei no Moribito and Ookiku Furikabutte and Ergo Proxy just as I’ve rewatched Buffy the Vampire Slayer (but only specific seasons), but I don’t expect to be rewatching Macross Frontier or Eureka Seven or Saiyuki or even Rurouni Kenshin. (Though the jury is still kinda out on Eureka Seven.) I mean, yes, I enjoyed Inuyasha a great deal but not once was a cliffhanger even remotely hanging for me.
Oh, how do I long for the days of ATPoBtVS, sometimes!
I shall now snark, because it’s my goddamn journal and I freaking can. Annoying* comments will be ridiculed and deleted, because I can do that too; here, “annoying” is defined as “anything seriously repeating arguments of the same ilk as I’m about to ridicule right now.” Here, have an analogy that I’m sure a lot of you will probably get more than if I restate any mecha-based analyses...
Me: Whedon seems to be using vampires as a metaphor for overgrown teenagers. So far, Whedon has shown us vampires like A, B, and C. Wonder what this means for the intentions of Big Bad A and Good Guy B?
Reply #1: Here’s a quote from Whedon, last year, talking about how in this season, he’ll be using vampires as a metaphor for overgrown teenagers!
Me: Gee, why didn’t I think of that? I could’ve just read the interview and said, “oh, well THAT settles it, I clearly don’t need to THINK because the AUTHOR has done it FOR me.”
Reply #2: You should really stop worrying about all this and just enjoy finding out what happens as it happens.
Me: I appreciate your concern for my blood pressure, but I assure you, my blood pressure is just fine, and the only time it actually spikes is when I’m struggling to find a polite response for those folks who confuse the anxiety of “worry” with the mechanism of “observer-story interaction”.
Reply #3: Why are you wasting all this time talking about vampires, it’s a show about vampires, deal with it.
Me: Yes, it was a post of a thousand words of which maybe a quarter were about vampires and the rest was about what the metaphor means in terms of characterization. Or maybe you missed that part.
Reply #4: This is really stupid. You’re so hung up on these stupid details. You’re like those annoying Anne Rice fans who argue for hours over the exact kinds of curtains Louis had or whether Lestat’s favorite coat was blue or green.
Me: I have this strange suspicion it’d go right over your head if I quip that the author is in the details.
Ahem. When I enjoy a story, it’s because I am thinking (not “worrying”, just thinking) about it. When I stop thinking about a story, I stop enjoying it. If I close the book mid-chapter and I don’t spend the next hour saying, “hunh, I wonder what’ll happen, and I wonder if she’ll call him on that, or if they’ll get away from the tidal wave, or if they’ll lose the game,” then the book or movie or series may be a good one but it’s a failure for me personally -- because it’s a storyline I’ll never revisit. I’ll probably end up rewatching Seirei no Moribito and Ookiku Furikabutte and Ergo Proxy just as I’ve rewatched Buffy the Vampire Slayer (but only specific seasons), but I don’t expect to be rewatching Macross Frontier or Eureka Seven or Saiyuki or even Rurouni Kenshin. (Though the jury is still kinda out on Eureka Seven.) I mean, yes, I enjoyed Inuyasha a great deal but not once was a cliffhanger even remotely hanging for me.
Oh, how do I long for the days of ATPoBtVS, sometimes!
I shall now snark, because it’s my goddamn journal and I freaking can. Annoying* comments will be ridiculed and deleted, because I can do that too; here, “annoying” is defined as “anything seriously repeating arguments of the same ilk as I’m about to ridicule right now.” Here, have an analogy that I’m sure a lot of you will probably get more than if I restate any mecha-based analyses...
Me: Whedon seems to be using vampires as a metaphor for overgrown teenagers. So far, Whedon has shown us vampires like A, B, and C. Wonder what this means for the intentions of Big Bad A and Good Guy B?
Reply #1: Here’s a quote from Whedon, last year, talking about how in this season, he’ll be using vampires as a metaphor for overgrown teenagers!
Me: Gee, why didn’t I think of that? I could’ve just read the interview and said, “oh, well THAT settles it, I clearly don’t need to THINK because the AUTHOR has done it FOR me.”
Reply #2: You should really stop worrying about all this and just enjoy finding out what happens as it happens.
Me: I appreciate your concern for my blood pressure, but I assure you, my blood pressure is just fine, and the only time it actually spikes is when I’m struggling to find a polite response for those folks who confuse the anxiety of “worry” with the mechanism of “observer-story interaction”.
Reply #3: Why are you wasting all this time talking about vampires, it’s a show about vampires, deal with it.
Me: Yes, it was a post of a thousand words of which maybe a quarter were about vampires and the rest was about what the metaphor means in terms of characterization. Or maybe you missed that part.
Reply #4: This is really stupid. You’re so hung up on these stupid details. You’re like those annoying Anne Rice fans who argue for hours over the exact kinds of curtains Louis had or whether Lestat’s favorite coat was blue or green.
Me: I have this strange suspicion it’d go right over your head if I quip that the author is in the details.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 22 Feb 2008 07:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 22 Feb 2008 07:39 am (UTC)