Jump to content


Doyle & Watson?

Started by Guest_Blue-Inked_Frost_* , Feb 02 2011 10:41 AM

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_Blue-Inked_Frost_*

Posted 02 February 2011 - 10:41 AM

Sherlock Holmes fandom gave the two great terms of Doylist and Watsonian for means of interpreting a text. If Doyle wrote the stories, then he made a simple error when Watson's wife called him James instead of John. But if Watson wrote the stories, then since he obviously didn't forget his own first name, his wife must have nicknamed him James because his middle initial stands for Hamish, the Scottish version of James. Fannish authors apply both Doylist and Watsonian standards at different times to things they choose to write about a text; what are your own philosophies on doing this? :)

Sometimes I lean toward the Doylist view. A simple, typo, 'author-didn't-think-this-all-the-way-through' example: "Xzar slipped his left arm around Imoen's waste and laughed wildly at the chaos about them, Gromnir's soldiers burning and the skeletons the two mages had summoned finishing off the foes." Given that it's crazy Xzar, a Watsonian interpretation of exactly where he's putting that arm is possible, but it's obvious what the author intended y/y? Sometimes, I think a continuity error is just a continuity error. I don't deny that it can be fun to play with in fanfic, especially depending on what makes for a better story; I love Dorothy Sayers' theory on Watson and his wife. (I also love the theory that Watson married Grace Dunbar from The Problem of Thor Bridge as one of his apparently several wives; she was a good person who deserved better than the story's love interest given her.) And yet sometimes I don't think it necessarily does make a better story. In Harry Potter, fanfics that explore how 'Voldemort is stupid' take out the main villain of the Harry Potter series, thereby leaving the writer to seek a new antagonist; conversely, the plot of 'Dumbledore (the hero's mentor figure) is secretly a supervillain' is actually beyond the number of mistakes the character and his author are guilty of and may create more plot holes than it fixes. But like any writing discussion, it invokes personal opinion and comes down to specific examples in the end: your choice whether deconstruction or reconstruction or this particular tale involving those particular events is better or worse. (And never a discussion of what shouldn't be written, only a discussion of what might or might not be better in writing. Everything should be written, that's how one comes to discuss this sort of thing.)

Or in this fandom, an example is Officer Vai's line on 'Go collect some bandit scalps'. And how exactly are you going to know they're from bandits, Officer? Even if you're capable of casting Detect Evil, it's not renowned for working on inanimate body parts! Realistically, Vai's line on collecting the scalps is likely to encourage bad people to present the wrong scalps for a quick bounty. (I suppose you could argue that since the bounty isn't a huge sum, she's set it low enough that the average evil-doer won't find it worth the risk to murder innocent people for their scalps.) But because most people seem to like her voice, and because she's one of few female Flaming Fists, most writers present Vai as a reasonable and capable representative of the local authorities and don't have characters call her out on the bloodthirsty requirement. And I like it, I liked her voice and I like that there's at least a couple good Flaming Fist female officers even though the majority of Fists are male. It's an instance of a choice between a Doylist (Vai seems intended by the writers to be a reasonable authority figure and that approach happens to read well in fic; there's obvious unfortunate implications to one of few female authority figures proving corrupt) versus Watsonian (Hey, are you sure Vai's not evil or stupid?) approach. Either can be made to work. (I thought it was Oryx who had a character tell off Vai for her scalp-collection techniques, but it didn't show up for me when I searched.)

Examples, thoughts, personal preferences? :)

#2 Guest_Coutelier_*

Posted 08 July 2011 - 04:43 AM

When I studied English Literature, I was taught to think about three things when writing my interpretation of something; consistency, context and background. And I've tried to stick to those ever since.

Consistency - well, it's a fairly obvious fallacy to pick out just a few lines of something that appear to back you up, and ignore the several hundred that don't. If Aerie really went around constantly whining about her wings, then that's what we would expect to see in her dialogue file; her just yammering on to every person she meets about having those damn wings cut off. But... it isn't. She actually doesn't start a single conversation about her wings with any NPC. So the constantly whining interpretation is inconsistant based on her interactions with every character besides the Bhaalspawn (and arguably, not even consistent with that since he encourages her to talk about it). Not that we expect constantly whining Aerie's to be used for anything other than humor. If we look at your example with Xzar; well, I would have to look back at his past interactions with Imoen and at how he's behaved in similar situations before, before I could judge it. Trouble is, it's Xzar, which is the next point:

Characters, like real people, obviously aren't always consistent. They make mistakes, get emotional, experience traumas etcetera. That's why context is important too. In the romance when the Bhaalspawn encourages Aerie to talk about her past, causing her to relive all those past traumas (way to go, you romantic devil!), her behvaviour does change as a result of her being depressed (that's my theory anyway, and I'm sticking with it :P). Or Imoen having a panic attack in the chateu, or Batman going ape after Spoiler was supposedly killed... obviously, you think about the circumstances. Historical context/setting matters too of course; collecting scalps might seem pretty bloodthirsty to us, but Vai lives in a world that is a bit more brutal, where people really do have to fight to survive. You can't expect her to share all the same values as a modern day police officer. Besides, you would have had to kill those bandits anyway (and I think she would probably find out if you went around the town killing people for scalps).

And background; obviously just the character's upbringing and past experiences. Someone from a travelling circus background probably isn't going to be bothered if her shoes get dirty. A mage should know if an item is magical or not. Someone with a background in medicine should know roughly where the heart is actually located on the human body (I hate it on TV shows when they get that wrong; I mean you spend thousands or even millions of dollars on this rubbish... how much time and money does it take to use google?)

Even applying all this though, there are lots of interpretations that come out of a single text. There could be lots of reasons why Aerie only discusses her problems with the bhaalspawn, or maybe Vai is just using the scalps to decorate her wall (we really just don't know enough about her).

These same sort of rules apply when I'm writing anything, really. To be honest, I don't really care that much how a character is portrayed in any fic, so long as within each story itself they are consistent and their behaviour makes sense with their background and in that context etcetera.

Edited by Coutelier, 08 July 2011 - 05:17 PM.

#3 Guest_AlphaMonkey_*

Posted 08 July 2011 - 03:45 PM

More substantive commentary to follow at some point, but I just had to needle you on this:

Batman going ape after Spoiler was supposedly killed


Wait, when did Bruce ever give a crap about Steph, again?

#4 Guest_Coutelier_*

Posted 08 July 2011 - 04:14 PM

More substantive commentary to follow at some point, but I just had to needle you on this:

Batman going ape after Spoiler was supposedly killed


Wait, when did Bruce ever give a crap about Steph, again?


He was pretty miffed when she was in hospital... actually, I think it was before she died that he went a bit crazy over it. As I recall, it took Barabara threatening to blow herself up to get him to calm down.

And he was all nice and fatherly to Steph when he thought she was dying, at least:

01, 02, 03, 04.

#5 Guest_AlphaMonkey_*

Posted 08 July 2011 - 04:56 PM

Which was retconned to him "suspecting" all along that something wasn't quite kosher and that she was never really dying in the first place. And of course he never told Tim about it. Ah, Bruce, you suck. :D

But yeah, I know all about that bit, I was just giving you a hard time. I joined the Cult of the Blonde Batgirl a while back, so I made sure to steep myself in lore. Hah.

But as to the -actual- topic...

-----

Sometimes, I think a continuity error is just a continuity error.


Ding.

The problem with assuming it's more than this is that you're often going to be too clever by half, and end up finding meaning where none actually exists and since, in the case of actual literature where you can't go running to the author for confirmation (since said author is long dead more often than not) you end up hunting for "easter eggs" and end up losing sight of the big picture as well as the true meaning of what's going on in the work. Seen it happen far too many times.

To an extent the study of literature is subjective, yes, and it's about people finding little nuggets of what appeals to -them,- but c'mon, folks, as they say, sometimes a rose is just a rose.

As for something like fanfic where it actually is feasible to go to the author and say "Hey, was that a little shout-out/allusion/etc. because if so, that was cool?" then you run into a different problem. What if it wasn't, and in your desire to mine a piece for its little hidden nuggets of gold, you went and completely -missed the point?- And went tromping back to the author going "Hey, look what I found? Pat me on the head, for I am brilliant."

Only to get a "Um. That was a typo." in response?

It's way too easy to get bogged down in the details, which is why even though details -can- be important, it's just as important to never lose sight of the whole picture. As Coutelier points out, consistency and context make up a huge part of it. People instinctively tend to latch on to the first significant thing that they come across. It's why when you meet someone, even a character in a game/book/movie/etc., first impressions are so important. You can easily get the wrong idea about someone if you obsess over one detail or another and don't let yourself look at the whole.

#6 Guest_VigaHrolf_*

Posted 08 July 2011 - 06:02 PM

Context and continuity are truly crucial to the whole exercise. As fun as it sometimes is to cherry pick around a piece or any other thing being analyzed, if you do without the grounding necessary, well then the meaning is both lost and can be freely manipulated. Take the kiss that Leia gives Luke. Take away the context of family and that gets a bit different. And to continue with the Star Wars example - there's always mistakes. Single points of failure all across the spectrum. One of my favorites being that in the original version, in the approach on the Death Star, one of those fighters is a tennis shoe because the model got broken and there was no time to replace. Doesn't mean that Keds can mount proton torpedoes. :)

Now, I'll admit, it can be fun to poke at those lines from time to time, but for the most part, the meaning and purpose gets too easily lost when you do.

#7 Guest_AlphaMonkey_*

Posted 08 July 2011 - 06:08 PM

One of my favorites being that in the original version, in the approach on the Death Star, one of those fighters is a tennis shoe because the model got broken and there was no time to replace. Doesn't mean that Keds can mount proton torpedoes.


Though, MAN, wouldn't it be awesome if they could?

Woulda made grammar school so much easier if I could just torpedo all the kids who messed with me.

"Eat flaming blue protonic death, losers!"

#8 Guest_Clight_*

Posted 08 July 2011 - 07:39 PM

I've also seen examples where the fan fiction writer picks up on an inconsistency or fault (or just uncharitably interpreted detail) from the games (I don't read a lot of other fan fiction than here) and highlights it, concluding that the character/plot point/whatever just is stupid. I don't really like that as a rule - especially with characters, since fan fiction writers seem to be so ready to pick on them anyway. You make a bad impression for some petty reason and you get made into a gibbering, evil idiot. (Note that in this case, we're probably talking about a minor character.) Don't you think it would be a better idea to change the detail enough that your story works, or elaborate it in a way that makes it make more sense, not less?

By the way, Officer Vai's reward fort he bandit scalps is actually huge in-universe, where a normal worker earns about a silver coin per day. Not so much for wealthy adventurers, but still.

Edited by Clight, 08 July 2011 - 09:47 PM.

#9 Guest_VigaHrolf_*

Posted 08 July 2011 - 08:30 PM

Don't you think it would be a better idea to change the detail enough that your story works, or elaborate it in a way that makes it make more sense, not less?


I think that's the most important touchstone in the process... is that the plot is going to HAVE to shift a little bit here and there to allow for the variances of each character. And then reinterpretation of them. And then, well, making things make more consistent sense per the rules of both the established universe and your personal fic verse.

#10 Guest_Blue-Inked_Frost_*

Posted 09 July 2011 - 09:29 PM

The problem with assuming it's more than this is that you're often going to be too clever by half, and end up finding meaning where none actually exists and since, in the case of actual literature where you can't go running to the author for confirmation (since said author is long dead more often than not) you end up hunting for "easter eggs" and end up losing sight of the big picture as well as the true meaning of what's going on in the work. Seen it happen far too many times.

To an extent the study of literature is subjective, yes, and it's about people finding little nuggets of what appeals to -them,- but c'mon, folks, as they say, sometimes a rose is just a rose.

As for something like fanfic where it actually is feasible to go to the author and say "Hey, was that a little shout-out/allusion/etc. because if so, that was cool?" then you run into a different problem. What if it wasn't, and in your desire to mine a piece for its little hidden nuggets of gold, you went and completely -missed the point?- And went tromping back to the author going "Hey, look what I found? Pat me on the head, for I am brilliant."

Only to get a "Um. That was a typo." in response?


Heh. And it's fun, very fun! As long as it's not taken too seriously. In Harry Potter fandom I used to see a lot of essays about conspiracy theories about the way the wizarding world's economics and politics worked, and I just thought they were fun ideas people came up with for ficcing purposes because it's plain from the blatant reading of the text that Rowling's wizarding world is amusing but really not an exemplar of Tolkienesque completely serious in every way worldbuilding. And then I saw the wank after the last two books were released and realised that these fans really did expect books six and seven to resolve every minor continuity error in tedious overexplanation and contain full treatises on the economic and political history of the wizarding world and the way it's totally racist against Slytherins and ~Darling Severus Snape~. (Not that the books were perfect, of course.) Adults spoil every fandom! :P

It's way too easy to get bogged down in the details, which is why even though details -can- be important, it's just as important to never lose sight of the whole picture. As Coutelier points out, consistency and context make up a huge part of it. People instinctively tend to latch on to the first significant thing that they come across. It's why when you meet someone, even a character in a game/book/movie/etc., first impressions are so important. You can easily get the wrong idea about someone if you obsess over one detail or another and don't let yourself look at the whole.


Yep. Sometimes it's hard to let go of a first impression--there are one or two characters I know where they had their reasons for behaving so obnoxiously in the beginning, underwent character development, and yet I still can't fully like them because I couldn't shake off that first impression. Not bad writing, just that in that case as a reader I couldn't shed the initial sentiments. Character development is an aspect of good writing and most writers do, and probably should, ignore the kind of reader who takes a first impression to the exclusion of all other evidence. But on the reader's side, it's fair enough to have that sentiment of the first impression, or to decide that having to slog through all ninety-hundred-thousand-words before the irritating character finally gets slapped in the face with a large wet codfish and changes is not their idea of fun. If it's a deliberate choice on the writer's part then they should know what to expect--make a character have a bad first impression on purpose, it's inevitable that some readers will go with that no matter how excellent the later character development.

I've also seen examples where the fan fiction writer picks up on an inconsistency or fault (or just uncharitably interpreted detail) from the games (I don't read a lot of other fan fiction than here) and highlights it, concluding that the character/plot point/whatever just is stupid. I don't really like that as a rule - especially with characters, since fan fiction writers seem to be so ready to pick on them anyway. You make a bad impression for some petty reason and you get made into a gibbering, evil idiot. (Note that in this case, we're probably talking about a minor character.) Don't you think it would be a better idea to change the detail enough that your story works, or elaborate it in a way that makes it make more sense, not less?


It can be funny and quirky to highlight those inconsistencies or faults or limits of the programming--I think the classic example might be Sir Anomen's charmingly indecent proposals made to you while trapped in the sucking flesh pits of the portal prison, or the decaying depths of Bodhi's lair, or the gore of the Unseeing Eye's pit. It's very easy to take remarks out of context, especially when you're free to invent the context in a fanfic. But if some characters are limited to repeating their game scripts in the most inappropriate contexts imaginable for comedic humiliation purposes, as if they were pixels in a videogame or something (:P), while others get the chance to grow and develop as if they were fantasy novel characters, it can come across as a double standard. I don't really like the author popping over my shoulder explaining which characters they like. And gibbering, evil idiots are my least favourite archetype stereotype ever.

It's very easy to take remarks out of context.

- Blue-Inked Frost, on remarks made that 'members of that people group are a blight and a stain and an abomination and ought to be hunted down for the good of humanity'


By the way, Officer Vai's reward fort he bandit scalps is actually huge in-universe, where a normal worker earns about a silver coin per day. Not so much for wealthy adventurers, but still.


The money situation can be quite odd--sometimes I'm concerned about trying to represent characters as reasonably sensible with money while only allowing them a realistic sum that's much less than the truly ridiculous amount of gold it's possible to carry in-game. And to say nothing of casual lines like, "They counted out four thousand gold pieces and gave them to the merchant before hurrying off"! No, you didn't, you probably spent at least a day carefully counting them out and watching the merchant scrape them against a touchstone. More probably they traded in gems or something, because carrying a lot of gold on your back is about as feasible as carrying three suits of full plate armour on your back. As useful as it is to have that ability in-game. ;)

Edited by Blue-Inked_Frost, 09 July 2011 - 09:32 PM.

#11 Guest_Jeannette_*

Posted 10 July 2011 - 08:18 PM

Context and continuity are truly crucial to the whole exercise. As fun as it sometimes is to cherry pick around a piece or any other thing being analyzed, if you do without the grounding necessary, well then the meaning is both lost and can be freely manipulated. Take the kiss that Leia gives Luke. Take away the context of family and that gets a bit different. And to continue with the Star Wars example - there's always mistakes. Single points of failure all across the spectrum. One of my favorites being that in the original version, in the approach on the Death Star, one of those fighters is a tennis shoe because the model got broken and there was no time to replace. Doesn't mean that Keds can mount proton torpedoes. :)



No Keds with proton torpedoes? :blink: *staggers* omg...next you'll be telling me there's no Santa Claus!

#12 Guest_Jeannette_*

Posted 10 July 2011 - 08:49 PM


I've also seen examples where the fan fiction writer picks up on an inconsistency or fault (or just uncharitably interpreted detail) from the games (I don't read a lot of other fan fiction than here) and highlights it, concluding that the character/plot point/whatever just is stupid. I don't really like that as a rule - especially with characters, since fan fiction writers seem to be so ready to pick on them anyway. You make a bad impression for some petty reason and you get made into a gibbering, evil idiot. (Note that in this case, we're probably talking about a minor character.) Don't you think it would be a better idea to change the detail enough that your story works, or elaborate it in a way that makes it make more sense, not less?


But if some characters are limited to repeating their game scripts in the most inappropriate contexts imaginable for comedic humiliation purposes, as if they were pixels in a videogame or something (:P), while others get the chance to grow and develop as if they were fantasy novel characters, it can come across as a double standard. I don't really like the author popping over my shoulder explaining which characters they like. And gibbering, evil idiots are my least favourite archetype stereotype ever.


lol! Pixels can seem so real though!!!! It almost sounds like a Bill of Rights is being proposed here. ;)

Seriously, lots of good points made. I'd like to add that I think the reader's free choice also applies. Certainly continuity, context, detail all the things expounded upon above are important in story telling. I think having a shared sense of humor can also help. We do seem to have different thoughts about how to apply these things though and that's where free choice comes in. If one doesn't like the way a writer has dealt with a character it's always permissible and possibly better for one's blood pressure to simply move on without reading further and even *gasp* without comment (Bad author, no cookie! Or should it be "Come to the dark side...we have cookies?" Trials and tribulations of old age...I never remember.). ;)

Seriously, it's unfortunate but we don't all enjoy the same types of stories or interpretations which then goes back to that choice thingy...

Personally I like the differences in interpretation and in exercising my ability to suspend my own perspective of a character (perhaps easier said than done). Just makes it easier to enjoy a story without getting too worked up or overly analytical. Of course that isn't always easy in which case I refer back to the Free Choice comment above. ;). Anyway -- it's just something that allows me enjoy both Coutelier's and Laufey's interpretations of a Certain Character for example. :)

Edited by Jeannette, 10 July 2011 - 09:16 PM.

#13 Guest_Blue-Inked_Frost_*

Posted 10 July 2011 - 11:27 PM

lol! Pixels can seem so real though!!!! It almost sounds like a Bill of Rights is being proposed here. ;)


Oh, dear, never that, rules are made to be broken when it's amusing to do so.

Seriously, lots of good points made. I'd like to add that I think the reader's free choice also applies. Certainly continuity, context, detail all the things expounded upon above are important in story telling. I think having a shared sense of humor can also help. We do seem to have different thoughts about how to apply these things though and that's where free choice comes in. If one doesn't like the way a writer has dealt with a character it's always permissible and possibly better for one's blood pressure to simply move on without reading further and even *gasp* without comment (Bad author, no cookie! Or should it be "Come to the dark side...we have cookies?" Trials and tribulations of old age...I never remember.). ;)

Seriously, it's unfortunate but we don't all enjoy the same types of stories or interpretations which then goes back to that choice thingy...


Heh, yes, and it's nice to give reminders when people are approaching endless walls of overanalysed feelings and thoughts on yaoi. There are lots of things that I read, and I'm glad even the worst of the worst exists, really, not least because I enjoy complaining and I'm sure the authors' mothers enjoyed reading. :) Every story's got multiple facets to it. How very much I enjoyed the subtextual communistic metaphor depicted in My Immortal as exemplified by the subtle fluctuations of the relationship between Ebony Darkness Dementia Raven Way and B'loody Mary aka Hermione Granger... :P

#14 Guest_Blue-Inked_Frost_*

Posted 11 July 2011 - 04:14 AM




Heh, yes, and it's nice to give reminders when people are approaching endless walls of overanalysed feelings and thoughts on yaoi. There are lots of things that I read, and I'm glad even the worst of the worst exists, really, not least because I enjoy complaining and I'm sure the authors' mothers enjoyed reading. :) Every story's got multiple facets to it. How very much I enjoyed the subtextual communistic metaphor depicted in My Immortal as exemplified by the subtle fluctuations of the relationship between Ebony Darkness Dementia Raven Way and B'loody Mary aka Hermione Granger... :P


Yeah -- some works really do make one bang one's head on the desk privately or perhaps to snark to friends but personally I can't even imagine feeling the need to poke fun at others publically. There are exceptions -- Charlie Sheen comes to mind. ;) But fan fic? Generally no. Do unto others and all that... :blink: Sorry if your comment was intended as humor...just didn't strike me quite the same way. ;)


Sorry, My Immortal is a somewhat well-known troll-fic written in the Harry Potter fandom. It was most likely written to be fair game. I'm trying to be general and panfandom here--certainly not to snipe at anyone here.

I follow a couple of fic-sporking communities on livejournal--there are some things that shouldn't be said on the author's home ground, but can be funny if taken elsewhere.

#15 Laufey

Posted 11 July 2011 - 04:48 AM

Seriously, lots of good points made. I'd like to add that I think the reader's free choice also applies. Certainly continuity, context, detail all the things expounded upon above are important in story telling. I think having a shared sense of humor can also help. We do seem to have different thoughts about how to apply these things though and that's where free choice comes in. If one doesn't like the way a writer has dealt with a character it's always permissible and possibly better for one's blood pressure to simply move on without reading further and even *gasp* without comment (Bad author, no cookie! Or should it be "Come to the dark side...we have cookies?" Trials and tribulations of old age...I never remember.). ;)


Oh, the Dark Side does have cookies. The special ingredient is the salty tears of the virtuous, which I find gives them a particularly delightful kick.
Rogues do it from behind.

#16 Guest_Jeannette_*

Posted 11 July 2011 - 05:00 AM



Seriously, lots of good points made. I'd like to add that I think the reader's free choice also applies. Certainly continuity, context, detail all the things expounded upon above are important in story telling. I think having a shared sense of humor can also help. We do seem to have different thoughts about how to apply these things though and that's where free choice comes in. If one doesn't like the way a writer has dealt with a character it's always permissible and possibly better for one's blood pressure to simply move on without reading further and even *gasp* without comment (Bad author, no cookie! Or should it be "Come to the dark side...we have cookies?" Trials and tribulations of old age...I never remember.). ;)


Oh, the Dark Side does have cookies. The special ingredient is the salty tears of the virtuous, which I find gives them a particularly delightful kick.


So that's what does it! I rather thought mine were missing something! *scribbles note to self....salty tears....*
Back to The Smithy


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

  1. Gamejag
  2. → The Craft of Writing
  3. → The Smithy
  4. Privacy Policy
Skin Designed By Evanescence at IBSkin.com