> seriousfic is awesome.
>
> In addition to being a fine author of fanfic, he/she/whichever is an Apodictic Speaker Of Truth on a number of subjects, the latest one being Joss Whedon and Doctor Horrible. Well, at least, he/she/whichever starts by talking about Joss and Doctor Horrible, but that merely serves as a springboard for his/her/whichever's thoughts on what is so very, very wrong about the Whedon style of writing romantic relationships. I'd recommend you read his/her/whichever's whole essay, but in the meantime, allow me to copypasta my favorite quotes:
>
> More and more, I’m starting to think of Joss Whedon as the Michael Bay of dialogue. He writes really good dialogue that lets you go on a really fun ride, but the destination is always the same. His twist endings are always “unexpectedly, tragedy strikes!†Basically, he’s that old cliché of darkness and edginess somehow being more artistically valid than a happy ending, with all the smug pretension such a position demands. I mean, “I give my audience what they need, not what they want� How did fandom let him off the hook for that and the one-way, almost dictatorial street of creator-fan interaction it implies?
>
> [...] He sees characters cynically, as puppets that are moved around to create Good Drama. We’re not supposed to root for couples or feel sorry when they split up. We’re supposed to applaud the Good Drama, the labyrinthine workings of this colossal machine built from secrets and characterization and continuity. It whirls and winds and grinds and eventually arrives at a Tragic Conclusion, while we applaud politely and observe that yes, truly, Joss Whedon is our master.
>
> When TPTB have a canon ship, it at least provides a sort of loyal opposition for fans who ship something else. There’s a plan they can oppose, instead of this irrelevant miasma of pairings that are all just as meaningless as the other. It kind of makes you suspicious of all the time spent on relationships in BtVS when by the end of the show, pretty much everyone was either single or widowed (except for the eleventh-hour lesbian relationship, because killing off Tara was politically incorrect). It’s like going into a romantic comedy and being told beforehand that the star couple won’t get together. Joss Whedon always ends his pairings with a tragedy, so what does it matter?
>
> Worse yet, this attitude has spread through the television world much like herpes at a convention in Vegas. Somehow, no relationship, platonic or otherwise, can be complete unless there’s a tragic ending. It makes things… ‘profound.’ Which is why every series of Doctor Who has to end with some tragedy befalling the Companion du jour, despite the chest-thumping proclamation of DW as a humanistic, positive show.
>
> [...] Of course, this is because the conventional wisdom says that Moonlighting started to suck when David and Maddie got together.
>
> That was over twenty years ago.
>
> Think about this. Imagine you’re writing a story, and someone comes up to you and says you shouldn’t go in X direction with the plot because another story did something similar twenty years ago and people didn’t like it. What would you say? “Well, maybe they didn’t do it right, but I’m going to do better!†“But here it fits the characters, and lets me tell all kinds of new story!â€Â
>
> Apparently, a lot of people say “Righty-o, more of the same old, same old then!â€Â
>
> They didn’t want Clark Kent and Lois Lane to be married. They don’t want Peter Parker and Mary-Jane to be married. They just want this eternal circle-jerk of sexual tension, as if this is the grand poombah of storytelling greatness. Sexual tension. Unresolved sexual tension.
>
> For some reason, romantic love is always a mirage on the horizon, never something tangible, consummated, treated maturely. Which is pretty dang weird. We don’t have this problem with platonic love.
>
> [...] Yet, the idea of treating romantic love with the same kind of consistent dignity is never broached. For some reason, heterosexual monogamy is a taboo. It’s not just outrageous, it’s NUTRAGEOUS.
>
> This subversion of the cliché has become so common that it’s as cliché as the cliché it’s supposed to replace. And, at the very least, the cliched happy ending is satisfying when earned. For some reason, God only knows what, writers everywhere have become convinced that while deus ex machina to give the good guys a happy ending is unforgivable, similarly contriving circumstances to give them an unhappy ending is worthy of praise and adoration. It’s profound! Artistic!
>
> [...] THIS. IS. NOT. GOOD. STORYTELLING. And don’t fool yourselves that it is just because Joss Whedon gives you a fan-boner.
>
> Go read the rest of it, because even though I didn't repost all of it above, I still agree with every single fucking word that he/she/whichever wrote.
>
> So, thank you, seriousfic, for being eloquent and thoughtful enough to say what I've long wanted to, except that my words on the subject would not have been nearly as good as yours.
>
> Truly, you are a gentleman (or lady) and a scholar.
|
|
