My sister has never lived in the US. That might be part of her resistance. Her barrier to entry is that much higher into Americana. She's passably fluent in three languages (well, passable in two, excellent in one), so it's not that she's not willing to parse the alien for entertainment.

What's clever or familiar or enchanting to us is twee and work to her.

What, I wonder, constitutes the difference between those who are willing (nay, compelled to) enter into a different world via its language and those who are turned off by a different world because of its language?

I don't know. But I did learn in the Great Literary Thread kerfuffle that many people think that the only purpose of language is to be transparent and Tell The Damn Story. That clarity is the highest aspiration of prose. That a writer's style is mostly like window dressing. Whereas for me, a writer's style is the writing.

(These are not polar opposites in opinion, and many folks were at varying points along the spectrum in their preference.)

My sister likes Buffy well enough, but can't watch it because of the way they speak.

I refused to watch Buffy for an age because of the language. It didn't strike me as being rich and flexible; it struck me as lazy comedic writing. All whatever-y this, and blank-girl that.

or even Shakespeare (cretons!)

People who don't like Shakespeare are pork spread?

Well THAT's embarrassing. Here I am, whinging about language and I prove that loving words does not mean I can spell them. Pork spread? That's a new one for me. Thanks for the edification Frank! (of course, I meant to say 'cretIn."

And ita, I'm totally busted on the non-Ameri-centric view. I wasn't even considering non-English or other language speakers.

While apt to have to dash any second now, as soon as my client arrives, I'm firmly in David's corner around the writer's style being as great deal of the writing. Gracious, I read Dave Egger's first book simply because the style kept me hooked...LONG after the substance had left me by the roadside.

And while I really do understand the folks who don't want to enter into say, the Buffyverse due to the language, what I don't understand is the anger-inducing aspect of the 'different.'

Dang...doorbell. Gotta go make a living.

People who don't like Shakespeare are pork spread?

Har! I think in my family we spell it with a g (guerton?) but mmmm.

That's what thinking outloud (or on the keyboard) will get ya...Thread Killing!

Sorry for the lack of clarity. I think I better think this notion through much more effectively before displaying it for public consumption.

In the meantime...so impressed with the spicy brains around these parts.

Mmmm...brains!

One thing that cracks me up is that Nathan Fillion and Adam Baldwin have gotten so used to the Firefly speech patterns that they use them when publicly speaking to fans, in (more or less) their own words. And I'm not 100% certain that's a conscious choice...

Hee. I love it. And it speaks to how natural a potential language pattern it was as written.

Regarding kid reaction: the fan's kid in our row had a great time, once he got his booster seat. I must admit I chortled a bit on realizing the dad was going to have to explain Kaylee's line. Everyone in the theater was laughing and the boy said, loudly, "Wait, what? What was run by batteries?" Then everybody laughed some more.