ted, I think you either disagree with the showing not telling philosophy of good television, or you don't understand it. If it's the former, you're entitled to your opinion. If it's the latter then feel free to join me in my corner since I don't get it 100% either. But I wouldn't argue with the mechanics of that philosophy. Obviously a knife throwing is a showing, while a speech is a telling.

Sure. If by telling you mean "speaking" and showing you mean "not speaking" you are obviously correct, but that seems a not very useful tautology. Speaking, after all, is an activity the same as knife throwing. But I assume that isn't what you mean. In which case I would argue Xander's speech (which I still remember) was more dramatic and effective storytelling than the knife throwing (which I'd completely forgot). Obviously ymmv-but then that is my point.

Ted, I feel like you're deliberately misunderstanding.

Spike throwing the knife *showed* something about his feelings for Buffy, his understanding of her, etc.

Xander's speech was about *Riley.* We learned about Riley from someone else talking about him.

We learned about Spike from something he *himself* did.

We learned about Riley (maybe) from something someone else said.

That's the difference between showing and telling.

I'm not saying 24 is a better show then BtVS. I'm saying the last few 24s have been more enjoyable to watch, then Buffy has.

For you. And that's fine. Not, however for me. Is one of us "wrong?" Not in any proveable sense. At most you could appeal for majority rule and take a vote among all Buffy fans, but if we are arguing popularity equals quality than Survivor is a much better show than BTVS ever was.

But the most startling thing they could do is write Jack's daughter not as a moron.

Hear hear.

I haven't been feeling the 24 love this year because I find it totally unbelieveable that so much crappy stuff could happen to one person in a 24 hour period, yet his bladder and bowel seem to be completely intact, despite him never going to the toilet once. And yet, I'm still watching.

For you. And that's fine. Not, however for me. Is one of us "wrong?" Not in any proveable sense.

Right. I was clarifying my previous post which described 24 as Good Television, and recent Buffy as NSM. 24 doesn't have the deepest characters and the richness of plot, but what it does have is kick-ass pacing and suspense. Buffy used to be all that and a bag of chips. Now it's lost some of the chips, and some of the all that.

his bladder and bowel seem to be completely intact, despite him never going to the toilet once

It's the same magic that healed his leg, and brought him back to life.

The First Evil.

Ted, could you just drop the "no absolute standards" argument? You have made your case that there are no absolute standards.

We are having an aesthetic discussion. It adds nothing to the quality of the discussion to say "Well, that's your opinion". I know that's my opinion. I said it. We can take it as read that anything I said is my opinion.

Would you care to debate the question now?

Ted, I feel like you're deliberately misunderstanding.

Spike throwing the knife *showed* something about his feelings for Buffy, his understanding of her, etc. Xander's speech was about *Riley.* We learned about Riley from someone else talking about him. That's the difference between showing and telling.

Except that Xander's speech really revealed more about Xander (and perhaps in her response Buffy) than about Riley. And that, I would argue, IS showing.

I haven't been feeling the 24 love this year because I find it totally unbelieveable that so much crappy stuff could happen to one person in a 24 hour period, yet his bladder and bowel seem to be completely intact, despite him never going to the toilet once. And yet, I'm still watching.

It is unbelievable. Just like Alias. But damn fun to watch. And he pees during the President/CTU scenes. Or when the audience does (during commercials and Kim scenes.)

Ted, I know you don't like my "tone." I'm trying very hard to doblerize.

But I can, in fact, prove that there is a quantifiable difference between "showing" and "telling."

"Telling" is having a character say "I'm sad," or without words, having the character break down crying.

"Showing" is having the same character in the middle of a scene where they are holding themselves together emotionally, pause and have a breif expression of pain flash over their face when faced with a reminder of their pain, and then contninuing on.

In the second example, you have not made it obvious for everyone to see (ie. telling), you have instead shown it breifly, in a scene which is presumably accomplishing something else.

Any bit of scene or dialog that only accomplishes ONE thing, and does so in a flashy, outward way, is not only "telling" rather than "showing," it's a waste of valuable screen time.

There's been a lot of that going around.

You can disagree with that, and say that it's a matter of subjectivity, and we *will* never agree on this, but that doesn't mean you're correct. There *is* a quantifiable difference between showing and telling, and this season *has* been telling too much.

You can like it if you want. But that doesn't make it as subjective as you would make it out to be.