11.03.06
WIDWL Part II: Why I Like Sci-Fi
One of the things I love about reading science fiction (particularly the instances set way in the future, like Peter F. Hamilton, or the recent Dan Simmons Illium / Olympos series, or Neal Stephenson’s non-Baroque cycle books) is how the reader is forced to play detective at first, collecting clues in order to piece together a working model of the world they are reading about. I like it best when the author draws this part out, forcing readers to read and re-read, eking out a sense of the landscape through glimpses of the background behind character and plot development.
I see Lost having this appeal as well, with the unfamiliar, mysterious context being central to the plot. egg mentioned in a comment to the previous post how viewers are drawn into the story because of this mystery, and because of the archetypal characters to whom they can relate. (Me, I relate to the extras in the background, the ones not cool nor good looking enough to be in the popular group with mysteriously intertwined backstories. Perhaps herein lies the real beef.)
However, science fiction typically has an end in sight. If not in the current book, then perhaps a trilogy, or in the mammoth Night’s Dawn Series, a total of six books (though in the UK it was published as three, presumably because British readers can handle 2,000 page books better than Americans? I dunno). A relevant exception would be certain fantasy series that seem to have dragged on and on, and not with uncovering any great mystery, but rather just maneuvering characters and events into the finale (see George R. R. Martin and Robert Jordan for examples). TV series run this risk inherently, because the studios want need to make money more money (… than they can ever make). The writers need to create a cohesive story that seems to follow some overarching timeline, but they are also tasked with drawing the process out for as long as the show is profitable (and ending it quickly when ratings and ad revenues tank). When those two goals are at odds, I’ll bet the latter takes precedence. Put another way, who would win in a fight, JJ Abrams or ABC?
I think it boils down to a few questions I’d put to the fans of Lost: Do you think the writers have the whole thing figured out already, or are they kind of playing it by ear and essentially improvising till ABC says “wrap it up”? If the former, do you have faith in the writers that the final reveal will be satisfying? Do the fates of shows like The X-Files and Alias worry you? Do you think putting characters name Locke, Hume, and Rousseau on the same island is a heavy-handed, ham-fisted play at injecting intellectualism, or brilliant writing?
Finally, Crystal pointed out to me that I just don’t like TV in general. Which is kind of true. I typically only watch Comedy Central, Cartoon Network, and the History Channel, with brief asides to watch Monk, Law and Order, and House. I think South Park is the pinnacle of TV storytelling. Usually the TV is on as background noise while I play PSP or DS.
Yes, I would definitely be an extra on that damn island.