You've got my support. Just think of me as...as your... You know, I'm searching for 'supportive things' and I'm coming up all bras.

Xander ,'Empty Places'


Buffy 4: Grr. Arrgh.  

This is where we talk about Buffy the Vampire Slayer! No spoilers though?if you post one by accident, an admin will delete it. This thread is NO LONGER NAFDA. Please don't discuss current Angel events here.


Glamcookie - May 14, 2003 4:54:50 pm PDT #172 of 10001
I know my own heart and understand my fellow man. But I am made unlike anyone I have ever met. I dare to say I am like no one in the whole world. - Anne Lister

24 rules. I have enjoyed 24 more than Buffy this year, but Buffy is the better show overall.


§ ita § - May 14, 2003 4:56:05 pm PDT #173 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

There *is* a quantifiable difference between showing and telling, and this season *has* been telling too much.

I agree with much of what you say, but how can "telling too much" not be subjective when you've not provided a definition of "too much"?


ted r - May 14, 2003 4:56:32 pm PDT #174 of 10001
"You got twelve, and they got twelve. The old ladies are just as good as you are." -Dr. Einstein

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.

But others have been offering their opinion as either fact, or at least more objective. Which obviously puts anyone who disagrees with them at a disadvantage.

As for example:

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.

And you can assert the opposite all you like but it remains an assertion, not a fact. Gravity is a fact-your views of Buffy are not.

Would you care to debate the question now?

I thought I have been, but perhaps I missed the question.


Betsy HP - May 14, 2003 4:57:05 pm PDT #175 of 10001
If I only had a brain...

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.

In that case, we're not making it clear what the aphorism means.

"Show, don't tell" means "Illustrate character within the events of the story, not by having the narrator/character describe it."

There's a nice short writeup here. [link]


Hayden - May 14, 2003 5:00:03 pm PDT #176 of 10001
aka "The artist formerly known as Corwood Industries."

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.

What did it reveal other than that the ME writers are capable of forcing characters to behave uncharacteristically when it suits their purposes? That Xander believes that love is worth giving up your principles? ('Cause the writers really played that part well. Except for the wedding. And the Inca Mummy Girl.)

Frankly, I have a hard time believing that you don't know what the difference between "showing" and "telling" is. Have I told you that I agree with Betsy anywhere in this post? However, you probably realize that by now, don't you? Would this post have been better if I had simply said, "Betsy, I agree with you."?


P.M. Marc - May 14, 2003 5:04:06 pm PDT #177 of 10001
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear

Sigh.

Next week, after the episode, remind me SOMEONE that I had a Really Cool Epiphany That's Probably Me Reading Too Much Into Things.

Okay.

Another example of showing not telling, using words this time.

And it's been a week, so NO WHITEFONT!!! HAHAHAHA.

Ahem. From the pen of the master himself:

-----

WESLEY It's done.

He looks back to her. She smiles sadly. Poor Wesley.

LILAH Look in the drawer.

He looks at her, confused. Then he looks to --

ANGLE - the filing cabinet. The file is back in the file pouch -- unburned. Wesley's hand slides it up to see her name, "Morgan, Lilah" there again.

Wesley looks back to her.

LILAH Flames wouldn't be eternal... if they actually consumed anything.

He looks at her, powerless to change her fate.

LILAH But it means something that you tried.

-----
On the surface, this TELLS you just that Lilah's contract is made of unholy asbestos, Batman. But watching the scene, how it was filmed, how it was acted, you see Tim & Co. SHOW you with a twist to the gut that Wesley's feelings for Lilah were behind his decision to take the tour. You SEE the desperation in his eyes change to satisfaction as it burns, SEE the sadness and fondness and sympathy on hers as she realizes she has to break it to him that there's nothing he can do to make things right, and you SEE the tenderness on her face and hear it in her voice when she says "Look in the drawer."

This wasn't a talky scene. It wasn't wordless, but it SHOWED rather than TOLD what the characters were feeling. I mean, it's causing me physical pain from the emotional impact just thinking about it. It has power.


Dana - May 14, 2003 5:07:01 pm PDT #178 of 10001
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.

Gravity is a fact

"Don't get me started." t /Phoebe


justkim - May 14, 2003 5:09:24 pm PDT #179 of 10001
Another social casualty...

Another example of talking, not showing, from last night:

Anya telling Andrew that, gee, she actually kinda likes humanity, when not one single thing since "Selfless" has shown us she feels that way.


Betsy HP - May 14, 2003 5:12:28 pm PDT #180 of 10001
If I only had a brain...

Note, also, that a lot of the telling in that scene is in the stage directions. The writer is telling the *actor* how to play the scene; he isn't telling the audience how to interpret it.


ted r - May 14, 2003 5:16:08 pm PDT #181 of 10001
"You got twelve, and they got twelve. The old ladies are just as good as you are." -Dr. Einstein

In that case, we're not making it clear what the aphorism means. "Show, don't tell" means "Illustrate character within the events of the story, not by having the narrator/character describe it."

I think I've had about all the condescension I care for. I understand the argument that is being made-I don't agree with it. By that definition Shakespeare is a supremely incompetent writer, for what are his plays but endless "telling." Ah, but tv and film are different mediums than the stage. Well yes-but one of the things I most admire in Buffy is that comparisons to Shakespeare are not ridiculous.

What did it reveal other than that the ME writers are capable of forcing characters to behave uncharacteristically when it suits their purposes? That Xander believes that love is worth giving up your principles? ('Cause the writers really played that part well. Except for the wedding. And the Inca Mummy Girl.)

For starters that Xander is a Romantic, that he was feeling guilty about his behavior towards Anya, amd that he identified with Riley. In the context of Xander's own later behavior (I fail to see how Inca Mummy Girl is relevant) it could be said to be hypocritical, but then that is also revealing. Speeches are not just what the words say-but who says them, how they are said, and in what context. And in that sense they can be showing as much-or more-than they are telling. (Harold Pinter's entire career is based on that.)