As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
An author's responsibility: on Lost, BSG, and the morality of making it up as you go
Qingu
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Oh, and it goes without saying, but SPOILER TAG ANY SPOILERS.
I am currently watching BSG, and if someone spoils shit for me I will reach through the internet and choke you with my cock.
It is said that the creators of Lost have said that they're not even going to try to tie up the loose ends on the show. Because, um, they've "run out of time."
Washington Post wrote:Many of the questions posed during the run of "Lost" that have been keeping you up at night are never going to be answered on the show but will instead be tossed on the compost heap like an old turnip, because, the writers say, they have run out of time.
...
"There's a lot of little questions that unfortunately we just don't have time to answer in the amount of time that we have left," co-creator Cuse told the uber-fans.
What with trying to keep all the intertwining story lines straight, it's probably slipped his mind that the "time we lave left" was determined years ago by Cuse and Lindelof themselves, which would seem to suggest that running out of time was something they had, um, planned.
Back in May of 2007, ABC and the creative team behind the weedy tangle of a series announced the show would end in the spring of 2010. Nearly three years later, at the Paleyfest, Cuse said of any unresolved plot issues: "Ultimately, the way we look at it is that if the characters don't care about that question, then we as storytellers don't care about that question."
Now, I have not watched Lost in several years because I have long feared the show would end up in this very predicament. A predicament that Battlestar Galactica also found itself in, and one that caused me to renounce any vestige of admiration I had for that show (which, before the final episode, was a lot).
Perhaps Lost's finale won't be as "deus ex machina" as BSG (I understand they have some kind of consistency Bible?) But I think there is a broader issue to talk about here:
To what extent should authors plan out their mysteries before introducing them to the audience?
The reason I got so upset with BSG is because, for me, part of what makes speculative fiction so compelling is the idea that this is a self-consistent world you're experiencing. That, even if there are mysteries and unanswered questions, there are answers somewhere, even if only in the author's mind. Reading and experiencing fiction, for me, depends on a relationship of trust. I need to trust that the author knows what he or she is doing, and furthermore that the author knows more than I do at any given plot turn or mystery.
Stephen King is an example of utterly failing to do this. In On Writing he basically explains that when he writes, he makes shit up as he goes along. This is probably why his books are so often criticized as not making sense, not being consistent, or having disappointing endings. I've only read the first book of the Dark Tower, and it was very engaging, mysterious, and well-paced. But I stopped when I heard it doesn't make sense because I need to trust that the author, at least, thinks it does.
There's also something about this technique that feels like "cheating" to me. You pull the audience in with what essentially amounts to stream-of-consciousness plotting. But then, when you get stuck, so does the audience. It's the equivalent of acting as a guide without knowing where the hell you're going, or anything about the landscape you're guiding me through. There's a moral dimension to writing like this—or, rather, an immoral dimension. It projects carelessless and thoughtlessness, ambivalence to the expectations of the audience.
So, do authors have a responsibility to think their plots and mysteries through before introducing them to the audience?
Qingu on
0
Posts
On topic, I don't think it's dishonest necessarily. I don't even know if there's a way around for things like TV shows where as you do the writing you often have literally no idea how much material you'll be able to present. Do I have 1 season? 5? Etc.
I think it's time for you to take a break from these overthought treatises. Have a beer. Watch some TV. Take a nap. Something relaxing, because there's no issue of morality in whether or not a writer doesn't plan things.
There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility. - President Theodore Roosevelt
And I'm also interested in this from the perspective of an aspiring author.
Personally, I prefer it when authors/writers/etc. have things planned out in advance, though I don't find it a necessity for largely episodic things where continuity isn't as much of a focus.
EDIT: Quingu, as a fellow aspiring writer, is it okay if we also discuss some techniques for avoiding the "Writing off the cuff" problem, so to speak? Because when you get down to it, it seems like there's always going to be some basic level where we're making up elements of the story as we go along. I think the issue is more trying to figure out how to reign those into a cohesive whole that fits together and make sure you have them settled out in advance before writing the final product
I was satisfied with the way the story turned out by the end of Defiance.
Really, the first four books of The Dark Tower are absolutely worth reading. The other ones I'd say you can skip, but if you liked the first one I can pretty much guarantee you'll like all the way up to book four.
edit: I'm not a king fan, but damn, now I'm gonna have to read the first four Dark Tower books again. If anyone has recommendations of books with a similar vibe, please let me know.
Doesn't mean that you can't tell fantastic stories that are planned from A to Z, but I think you get results with either approach that can be absolutely fantastic.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
As to Lost, I think the expectation is that the writers will wrap up the major plot elements, but a lot of the minutae that SuperFans might consider "important" are going to be left alone. I'm fine with this, because I am not a freak.
This, so hard.
It's one of an absolutely miniscule pool of narratives that are so well constructed you don't realize they never intended half of it from the beginning. You can play Defiance and genuinely believe that some of this stuff was planned from Blood Omen.
edit: Lanz: yeah technically another game was being made, but Defiance resolved and/or explained like 85% of the major plot threads.
??
No it finished. Everything came full-circle.
I'm not criticizing authors who start writing one thing and then change mid-stream. I actually imagine that's probably an inevitable part of the writing process to some extent.
But in the case of a series, you don't get to hold your ideas in while you change and refine them because there are, presumably, weekly deadline pressures. To be fair, I imagine this makes it way harder to both invent and organize a consistent plotline, so perhaps Ron Moore and Lost writers deserve way more credit than I'm giving them. But Stephen King? I don't think he goes back and re-arranges before he releases the books, like your Kain example.
The last three definitely aren't as good as the first four, but they're still worth reading. King does some really interesting things in there, and I think the ending is pretty satisfying.
As to planning everything out from the beginning, it just doesn't work that way. When you start writing a story, even if you "know" the ending in advance, there's no guarantee that you're going to think that's the best ending down the road. What seems like a good idea from the outset can seem retarded once you get there. If you're writing a single book, it's not a big deal - if your ideal ending no longer meshes with your beginning, just edit things until they fit. If you're writing a TV series, it's more of a pickle. You can either keep the original ending that you now think is subpar, or you can work towards your ideal ending and retcon some of the beginning and hope nobody notices. To an extent, I'd prefer the latter, as long as it's not too egregious. I'd rather have a great ending than super-duper consistency throughout.
Actually I believe that a lot of the stuff from BO2 was left hanging. I mean technically it felt a little bit "outside" the rest of the series but things like
The only odd part is going to be that it's been renewed for a new season past that, and it's hard to say where the heck it's going to go from there
Rowling claims to have written the epilogue when she started writing the books. Presumably, she didn't realize how dark her books would get because the epilogue feels completely out of place with the grittiness, moral ambiguity and terror that build up to the last book. I would have preferred that she toss out her pre-written ending and write something new and more consistent with the tone of the series' finale.
There are plenty of shows where strange shit happens and then next show it's as if it never occurred. Writers aren't obligated morally to meet the expectation of their fans, they are just shitty writers (in my opinion) if they spew things out without thinking about where they are going in the narrative with it.
As a side note, I stopped watching lost a long time ago when it became evident the authors just do whatever the fuck they want and never tie up loose ends.
In my own experience, as ElJeffe said, planning character actions and plot arcs, and sticking to it, is very hard. Oftentimes you don't realize what your characters would "naturally" do in a situation until you actually write the scene, and sticking to what you've outlined would seem fake or weird. And I think BSG, at its best, benefited from this kind of "naturalism"—the characters' actions all seemed very believable in the context of the situations they found themselves in with the exception of course of the last episode.
But I think this "plane" of writing—plot and characters—is somewhat separate from the "plane" of worldbuilding. The idea that there are rules that your plot and characters must follow. Would you agree that it's important to set up, and stick to, these kind of rules—even if you don't stick to your plot outline?
Well if I'm reading you right that's correct -
Blood Omen had a totally self-contained narrative. Soul Reaver was a "centuries/millenia later" sequel which did have a lot of links to the original but again could easily be taken on its own (in fact Soul Reaver had a "true" ending before they decided during development to make a sequel). It's not until Soul Reaver 2 that we really start getting into this whole extra-dimensional/time-travelling meta-narrative where "x" event in Blood Omen is linked to "y in Soul Reaver, z from inbetween and x2 from an alternate timeline".
Anyway like I mentioned, the LoK series is part of a tiny minority of narratives where the writers actually pull this off without looking stupid and desperate. I loathe TV series that make it up as they go along as much as you do, as in 99% of situations they fail to be convincing.
I am currently watching BSG, and if someone spoils shit for me I will reach through the internet and choke you with my cock.
Unless you are going to argue some sort of Kantian notion of an inherent moral responsibility to, say, the act of writing I think it very difficult to posit "responsibility" onto an author.
So, that may be the question to ask: Upon what would you found your "should" claim? Whence the responsibility?
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Anywho... I thought I'd throw up this link: http://blog.ted.com/2008/01/jj_abrams.php
If you haven't seen it, it gives you a pretty good idea how his brain works and how he approaches stories.
Executive summary: The idea of there being a mystery is much more important than the fact of there being a mystery, and mysteries are always much more interesting when they are still mysteries. Build mystery first, figure out what it is later if you have to... but doing that kind of ruins it, so its better if you can get away with leaving the mystery in its box.
I remember something like this happening with Twin Peaks back in the day. I remember being curious, but not really old enough to get it yet at that point.
Re: The Dark Tower, the world seems to get smaller (despite the multi-dimensionality of the whole thing) the further you go. Esp. post accident. Part of that I think was King's outlook on life and writing evolving, but part of that is just the nature of fictional worlds. They start with almost infinite possibility, and shrink as they are defined by what happens in them.
I agree with you largely, ElJeffe. However, Lost encourages the viewers to scrutinize absolutely everything about the show in order to progress a viewer involved storyline/mystery concept. They don't have a responsibility to anyone, per se, but their idea would definitely be better executed if they weren't inadvertently damaging that idea by not being consistent with their plot threads.
Then why use the word?
X-Files would have lasted about 3 episodes if the viewer came away feeling like they really understood what was going on.
I'm just now starting Lost (Netflix Instant) and am halfway into season 2. Don't you go ruining it for me.
Simply start watching better series, they are out there you know. Cough Veronica Mars cough.
Maybe that would have been for the best - that last season was a stinker!
I am.
Well
In Blood Omen 2, he's freed and teams up with Vorador & Middle Kain - Vorador being another massive plot hole since his ressurection in BO2 and absence in later periods is unexplained - before being knocked into the Hylden Dimension.
Remember that this is pre-Soul Reaver, chronologically. What happens to Janos in that dimension is never shown, not even an offhand "yeah we tore the dude up" remark in defiance. Moreover, the details of that dimension, of the nature of the hylden, and of the relationship between the demons of that dimension and the hylden is unexplained (Kain is stranded in there for a while. How he escapes - or is let out - is unclear).
Finally, the reason why the BO2 prophet/oracle - who is blatantly a female hylden - is knocking around in Nosgoth or helping Kain is never expounded upon, nor is her fate.
I believe I read that both Vorador and sexy Hylden lady were meant to reappear in later titles, or at least sexy hylden was.
How many episodes/seasons have you seen?
Sometimes a story just needs a few mysteries.
Kind of a question: Why are you in a thread discussing the handling of Lost's plot revelations if you want to avoid Lost plot revelations? Probably the wrong thread for you to be in in general, even if everyone tries really hard to spoiler everything.
They specifically write holes that they can fill in later (Billy's hand) or to make a joke (the boys' mom.)
Would LOST have dodged all this heat if Damon and Carlton were upfront about not knowing every answer in the beginning (if that was the case)? Could we have just enjoyed the ride for what it was? Or would the show have been canceled two~three seasons in?
Maybe it's something as simple as one being a drama and the other a comedy show.
For LOST I just want closure. I don't need Jacob to spend three episodes explaining to me the purpose and significance of The Hurley Bird. I'd just like to know that these little side mysteries served some function to the greater mystery: Why are they on this Island? I can swallow the idea that all those things the characters, and we, encountered were pushing them, and us, towards something. I'm going to be pissed if the mysteries were nothing more than crap Carlton and Damon threw in just for the sake of having mysteries. I'm not doubting it's both.
I'm not getting my hopes up though. I'm really expecting something King-ish in terms of a finale, which is disappointing.
But the idea of not planning a storyline has worked for some shows - in a commercial sense. Look at 24 - I was surprised (and perhaps a little disappointed...) when I watched a few "making of" docos of the earlier seasons. They wrote the show as they went, and the wrote characters in and out as the ratings dictated.
On a personal level, I find that disappointing, and the lack of overall vision probably does show.
I actually respect shows like the Sopranos, where I felt that they had a story to tell, and sometimes it went in directions I didnt like... But at least they were telling their story.
As an example I will cite one of my favorite stories, evar, is ... Final Fantasy 4.
Now, the game starts out as a relatively standard swords-and-sorcery style setting. The main mystery is, "who is this evil sorcerer Golbez, and why does he want these crystals?" There are little hints that the moon might have something to do with it but it's very subtle.
Then the mystery is revealed. I still remember, when I was like 12 and first played this game, how utterly shocked and excited I was. The reveal didn't diminish the mystery. Wanting to solve the mystery is what propelled the plot and my attachment to the story, but once it got explained I wasn't like "oh, I don't like this game anymore." I was like "YES LET'S GO FIGHT SPACE WIZARDS"
When they are well-done, "aha" moments don't diminish the story, they empower it and add a new layer of excitement. Understanding the true nature of things can be very exciting.
I think Abrams' point does have merit, but I think it's mostly limited to scary mysteries. Something is certainly scarier when you don't understand it, and good horror movies know to keep their monsters in the shadows. David Lynch, who I have mixed feelings about, does a very good job at least wielding mystery to layer on sheer terror and bewilderment to his experience.
However, I don't think this really applies to something like Lost or BSG. There's a big difference between leaving mysteries unsolved to achieve an emotional effect, and leaving them unsolved because ... you can't figure out how to tie up your loose ends.