Emma + Baelfire = Swanfire

[nevermore]

Late to the party, but thanks @RG for linking that Kiki article. Well written, and I think really on point.

Someone who is more of a Lost fan than I was might comment to this, but I was really struck by the way in which A&E (and ABC marketing A&E) have linked them to Lost. After reading some of the background on the show’s production, I was really surprised to realize they had come on board to a show that was already in motion  (it was the brainchild of JJ Abrams, Lieber, and Lindelof originally).

And here’s the thing that struck me in relation to this. I think A&E might be, at their core, fanfic writers. Not to actually insult fanfic writers because there are many excellent writers who also write (or who have started with) fanfic. For example, I think Seanan MacGuire/Mira Grant’s books are delightfully entertaining, and she often says in her interviews that she learned the craft by writing fanfic. Anyway, point being, there’s something very particular about fanfic — you don’t do the world-building, you build on/reinterpret something that’s been created by someone else. So that’s what I think A&E really are, and where many of their failings come from. They suck at world-building. It worked for S1 because OUAT at its core is a fanfic, and OUAT S1 did what a good fanfic does: reinterprets the original source, fills in the blanks, and lets you see the story/stories in new, surprising light. And then, they ran out of ideas — and, I think, just never developed the skillset that a writer needs to create a credible world and “hack your brain” — and so what they produce is ever more mediocre, derivative, and cliched. Even their “prize” romances can rival the offensively bad fan-driven ships (in the fine tradition of the Rey/Kylo Ren shippers). Anyway, one of the points that article makes is that A&E are simply incompetent writers who don’t learn from their critics or their mistakes. I think that’s dead on.

[RumplesGirl]

Someone who is more of a Lost fan than I was might comment to this, but I was really struck by the way in which A&E (and ABC marketing A&E) have linked them to Lost. After reading some of the background on the show’s production, I was really surprised to realize they had come on board to a show that was already in motion  (it was the brainchild of JJ Abrams, Lieber, and Lindelof originally).

Yes and Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse (the latter of whom was brought on fairly earlyish in the first season when Lindelof was feeling totally overwhelmed and needed help running the shebang) ran it for all 6 seasons. Abrams was brought on to help develop Liber’s original pilot episode and he helped conceptualize some of the first season but both Abrams and Liber removed themselves from the picture early on. Abrams handed it over to Lindelof and was like “okay, good luck!” He came back to direct an episode of S3 but he had very little involvement after he helped develop S1. Personally, I’ve always considered it to be Lindelof and Cuse’s child.

A and E were eventually given exec producers titles, but they were always just part of a very large, sometimes changing, writing staff. They are credited with writing a later episode of S1 but the story idea was actually another writer’s (who left shortly after, IIRC). They stuck to Hurley-centric stories a lot, which is fine. He is an important part of the narrative, but his stories were always more “B” stories as opposed to, say, Jack or John Locke stories which had the serious meat of the show. I would call their LOST work a very mixed bag. They had some good episodes (and Greatest Hits is easily their best work on LOST and one of the top 20 episodes of the series) but they also had a lot of mediocre, forgettable ones that moved the plot along but weren’t the sort that get remembered years later (Fire and Water; Dave; Tricia Tanaka is Dead). They also wrote what I easily consider the worst episode of the entire series, “Expose.”

I can see why ABC ties OUAT to LOST (and even other media outlets do this, always bringing up LOST when they interview A and E); LOST is actually the only reason ABC took a look at OUAT. LOST was a huge cultural phenomenon but OUAT and LOST are worlds apart not only in terms of narrative and talent but also ratings and cultural cache. And while LOST gets a lot of slack from critics nowadays for their 6th season, I would put LOST S6 up against anything (anything!) from OUAT S3b-present day and dare people to pick OUAT over LOST.

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[sciencevsmagic]

So it seems like we’ve moved on a bit, but I wanted to comment on the article @RG posted about fan culture and entitlement. Interesting read.

 

I don’t necessarily agree with the article’s central premise though, which the author sums up in her final paragraph:

 

Fans don’t need to get what they want, and much of the time, they probably shouldn’t. Sometimes, they will; it’s unrealistic to expect that every piece of art or pop culture with any kind of dedicated following can find a way to satisfyingly sidestep or subvert the expectations of every person in that following. But the more often that can happen—the more often movies can assert themselves as creative works made by directors and writers and editors and actors and cinematographers, not in service of fans—the better.

 

There’s an assumption here that without pressure from fans, writers, producers and other artists will be free to assert themselves with originality and boldness, completely free of any expectation. That’s not the case. Art is nearly always a form of fan-service, especially commercial art. Writers, artists etc usually create with the intention of sharing their work. Many, if not most, want their work to be as popular as possible. Popularity depends on including ideas, characters, relationships that will appeal to a mainstream audience. So these are often included in the work. In other words, fan-service.

 

This type of fan-service is implicit, rather than explicit (which is the type the article talks about). It is more subtle than a hashtag campaign, but also more ubiquitous, deeply ingrained and influential. Certain privileged groups, straight white males for example, hardly ever have to send a tweet in anger. Writers and producers will meet their needs and wants without having to be told. White males are vastly overrepresented in Western media. Most books, movies and TV programs feature straight relationships. I’m certain that there have been countless instances where a producer or an editor has requested an author to include a romance (straight), or change the gender of the protagonist to make it more appealing to a mainstream audience. All fan service.

 

The author worries about fan culture “promoting a form of conservative stasis rather than active engagement”. While I can understand what she’s trying to say, I think she misses the point that culture itself usually has this influence on creative work. This is why we have underrepresentation of minority groups, heteronormativity and other issues. Artists are by no means completely free to create what they want. Societal, cultural, religious and other influences, either conscious or unconscious, will always shape the choices they make when they create. These influences usually nudge them into decisions that favour majority or privileged groups in society. If art really were as pure, uninhibited and free without fan pressure as the article seems to imply, then #MakeElsaGay would be redundant. There would already be Disney princesses who were gay.

 

[nevermore]

I can see why ABC ties OUAT to LOST (and even other media outlets do this, always bringing up LOST when they interview A and E); LOST is actually the only reason ABC took a look at OUAT.

I think that’s probably true. At the same time, you’d think A&E have had the opportunity to really get their writing/show creating chops to tip top notch by now, and they just haven’t. Between the experience with Lost, and their really long run with OUAT, they should have a clue about how to do this. As in, plan ahead. As in, stop being a toddler on social media.

The show is getting steadily worse with every season, but it’s still hanging in there. Sometimes, I wonder how much this is a factor of the audience (whether fandom or GA) extending them undue credit because of their association with Lost. But of course, it’s not just them — there are other people, from the cast to folks like Jane Espenson, who lend their name to the show, and prevent it from tanking completely, without being able to pull it out of the bog of mediocrity within which it is mired.

There’s an assumption here that without pressure from fans, writers, producers and other artists will be free to assert themselves with originality and boldness, completely free of any expectation.

I totally see what you’re saying, @sciencevsmagic, and I think that’s largely right. There’s always the imagined reader/viewer. But I also read that article as a commentary on A&E’s inability to learn from their mistakes, or to take critique in a productive way that would allow them to grow as writers. There’s something very basic about A&E’s failings, and that’s their  utterly idiotic refusal to admit that they don’t plan ahead very effectively.  Just to give an example of a different way of writing… So, a few years back, I happened to spend some time in Santa Fe, New Mexico, which is where GRR Martin is. Santa Fe’s a weird town, it’s mostly retirees, artists, and writers , so coffee shops are super busy. I happened to also do my work at coffee shops, so I’ve seen GRRM do his thing. The dude would sit there with his wife and world-build. For hours. That’s what they’d do — they’d just sit and draw up this really intricate mythology that will likely never make it into anything GRRM writes except for oblique hints because it’s just too damn much. There is way more world than there are books, or space to describe. I am sure there’s still an argument to be made that GRRM isn’t free from audience expectation, and he’s still writing in such a way as to sell his books. But I think he’s breathed enough life into the world that he’s built that it’s got its own momentum, laws, and overall functioning that can’t be jettisoned in favor of fan service. If you’ve imagined a world with a particular physics, you aren’t going to suddenly change those laws to make the fans happy. But that’s exactly what A&E do over and over again, because I think they either don’t care about how “organic” their world building is, or they just don’t realize that they’re supposed to be consistent if they want their viewers to invest. Minimally, it would be useful to have established rules to their magic system. But they haven’t even managed that. That might have worked for one season, when much is still left offscreen and up for speculation, but 5 seasons later, it’s just a hot mess.

[sciencevsmagic]

But I also read that article as a commentary on A&E’s inability to learn from their mistakes, or to take critique in a productive way that would allow them to grow as writers. There’s something very basic about A&E’s failings, and that’s their  utterly idiotic refusal to admit that they don’t plan ahead very effectively.

Yep, I was speaking in very general terms, responding only to the content of that article. In regards to A & E, I agree with yourself and others here about their failings. I think they lack a well rounded writing skill set and are incapable of managing a large scale project like OUAT. They fall short in so many different ways that I can’t attribute it to any one weakness; it just seems to be incompetance.

Here’s an amusing example of A & E’s inability to learn from their mistakes. In its later seasons, ‘Lost’ was criticized for its many and confusing time jumps. In S5, I heard the exact same complaints about OUAT, especially in ‘The Bear King’. It’s confounding that A & E managed to reproduce this very specific problem so faithfully. I mean, I can’t imagine that they were unaware of the confusion it caused on ‘Lost’. So I can only presume that they’re wearing blinders and plowing ahead with the mantra, “Anything ‘Lost’ did was good, so we’ll copy it.” The same goes for flashbacks. On ‘Lost’, they started feeling repetetive around S3, so the writers switched over to flash-forwards and flash-sideways. A & E have been nowhere near as adaptable.

Sometimes, I wonder how much this is a factor of the audience (whether fandom or GA) extending them undue credit because of their association with Lost. But of course, it’s not just them — there are other people, from the cast to folks like Jane Espenson, who lend their name to the show, and prevent it from tanking completely, without being able to pull it out of the bog of mediocrity within which it is mired.

I’d say that OUAT’s success and endurance flatters A & E. I think it can be attributed to the following three things:

1) A very clever idea which leveraged the pre-existing popularity of Disney characters.

2) Phenomenal casting. These days, Lana and Bobby’s acting is what carries the show, along with Colin’s sex appeal.

3) Luck. A & E were lucky to be associated with ‘Lost’ and they’re lucky that ABC has no contenders to usurp OUAT’s time slot.

 

[Bar Farer]

I believe that the main problem is that A&E no longer try to tell a story anymore, but rather to sell a product. For a long time they have underestimated their fans, thinking they only care about ships and the Disney stuff, which some do, but most want to see a story with characters being told. Therefore, A&E thought they can get away with presenting a story with inconsistencies and continuity errors.

"All your questions are pointless"

[RumplesGirl]

So, a few years back, I happened to spend some time in Santa Fe, New Mexico, which is where GRR Martin is.

1) How have you never told me this before

2) Yes, Tolkien did the same thing though sans coffee house (more of an ale house…)

3) O_____________O

4) So basically everything that made it into the World Book

1) A very clever idea which leveraged the pre-existing popularity of Disney characters. 2) Phenomenal casting. These days, Lana and Bobby’s acting is what carries the show, along with Colin’s sex appeal. 3) Luck. A & E were lucky to be associated with ‘Lost’ and they’re lucky that ABC has no contenders to usurp OUAT’s time slot.

#1 and #2 especially. I also think it help (in the #3 luck department) that many of OUAT’s fellow ABC shows are doing worse in terms of ratings. The writing can be bad but as long as its steady, ABC has a show that ad buyers can rely on. We talk about OUAT as if it’s the product to sell and whether or not it can be sold depends on the quality of said product but I don’t think that’s exactly true. At least not in the network/ad buyers realm. We, the viewers, are the ones being sold. The ad buyers are buying our time, our eyes, our desire to check out the whatever they’re shilling out.

So as long as we can still be bought at top dollar, then the longevity continues. (I really am starting to fear a S7)

I believe that the main problem is that A&E no longer try to tell a story anymore, but rather to sell a product

*points to above for product discussion* but yes I agree that A and E aren’t really trying to tell a story anymore. Or at least, they don’t plan a full coherent sensible story. Just look at what happened to Sean/Robin this year.

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[PriceofMagic]

A&E have undone the entire premise of the show itself: that the only way to get to a “land WITHOUT magic” was to cast the dark curse.

All of a sudden there is numerous ways to travel between various worlds and Storybrooke, and now the land WITHOUT magic has magic.

In retrospect this makes Rumple look like an idiot that he relied on a dark curse to get him to Storybrooke whne there are numerous other methods he could’ve used.

All magic comes with a price!

Keeper of Felix

[rainbow2]

Have to say i want to see next season ratings competing against NCIS LA, since CBS made some changes on their sunday schedule and next season instead of madam secretary that let`s face it was boring and way more to older people, they decided to put maybe the youngest cast of NCIS brand on sundays as 8.

[RumplesGirl]

they decided to put maybe the youngest cast of NCIS brand on sundays as 8.

The young cast is interesting and it will be interesting to see the ratings drama play out, but I personally don’t think it will mean anything. The young cast aside, NCIS is still very much an old people show. It doesn’t seem to matter which new “thing” they tack on to the franchise, it always skews very old. And after the big Supergirl debacle, I don’t think CSB is holding out any hope for the youth of the world to come flocking to a new show that’s really just the same show for a franchise that’s…what…20 years old now?

ETA: I just had a quick look at their ratings. NICS LA always has more eyeballs than we do (like close to 8 million) but their demo’s are always around the same as our S5B ratings…so 1.3, 1.2, ect. That more or less proves my point: the young cast means nothing; it’s still only older people watching. That’s a show (and, really, network) that skews very old

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[Author]

Posts