A Writer's Responsibility
Nov. 8th, 2008 05:48 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cedar_groveThis is long, and I make no apology for the majority of it not being under a cut.
Today, I have had it irrevocably spelled out for me that I could never write for a network television show... and I'll be surprised if I ever get published - why?
Because I won't compromise.
I have been sitting here today trying to put into words just how I feel, right now, over the question of what /is/ a writer's responsibility.
Is it to bow to pressures of a society that seeks to be entertained only by a 'fluffy bunny,' 'black and white,' 'comfortable' view of a world where there are no monsters under the bed, and we're not faced with moral questions that might alarm us when we see our answers?
Or is a writer's responsibility to her characters, their integrity, and the integrity of the world/society they write.
Is it a writer's responsiblity to challenge us as readers (of any kind of text, be that literary/visual/audio etc) - to hold up the mirror before our faces that prompts us to see within those dark corners of our own beliefs, attitudes and psyches, and make us think and to make us realise, as we examine the villain, Wait a minute - I understand - and there but for the grace of God, go I.?
Is it a writer's responsibility to remind us that the world is not a fluffly place, but that in spite of that, there is still hope?
Is it a writer's responsiblity to remind us that the answers to moral questions aren't 'black and white,' but that in spite of that, there is still hope?
Is it a writer's responsibility to remind us that, actually, there are monsters under the bed and that they could well be, likely are of our own making, but that there is still hope?
And should the writer hold up all of that to us and say, Look... I am the voice of your conscience, I have seen your actions, and your thoughts. I know you and can judge you, and find you wanting, but there is no cause for alarm - do not despair, because there is still hope.?
I believe the all of the latter.
There is only one TV show I could name that consistently, through all its incarnations, was not afraid to do that - to challenge us, to hold the mirror to us, to shake us from our comfortable complaceny and to make us think. That show is Star Trek.
They did it consistently, and they did it well, and still, at the end of each dark night they took us through, made us face, they left us with the message that, yes, there is still hope, but that it is our responsibility to take that potential and shape it, embrace it, make it ours.
They did it in The Original Series, they did it in The Next Generation, they did it with bells and whistles in Deep Space Nine, they did it less well in Voyager, but they still did it, and yes... they even did it in Enterprise toward the end - but then what happened? The show got cancelled.
Is it a symptom of the sickness in our society that we, as a people, given the choice would turn our back on anything and everything that holds that Mirror Darkly up to our faces and demands Look! - that we abrogate the responsibility for our own morality and moral choices - everything that proves our humanity - to others, whom we then revile?
Give us more shows like Star Trek, Writers - challenge us. Shock us from our moral apathy! Show us the real world through your art.
Last night, Stargate: Atlantis, one of the shows that created for us a wonderful 'dark mirror,' with such potential for the kind of examination of ourselves that I fear we need, finally capped its consistent failure to do so. I know there are many who will read this paragraph and tell me, "Yes, but that's not the kind of show it is. They don't write like that." and while I acknowledge that, know that you're right, and hate that it's true - I still had hope.
While the episode was exciting, tense, and contained a lot of good lines, there were too many occasions where the characters displayed stupidity, or in the end were just so out of character, on many levels, that in the end it lessened the impact of the episode.
I truly believe that, in the end, the ultimate victory in this, is Michael's. He proved his point. We're not that different, and in that it made his end that much more ignominious and disrespectful.
The episode treated him badly.
I suppose I'm somewhat biased. I've never really been able to see Michael as a 'villain' in the classic sense of the word. More like and antagonist, perhaps I'd even go so far as to say an 'anti-hero.'
There's been a lot of discussion about the rights or wrongs, merits or otherwise of Fan Fiction on the blog of one of the producers of SGA - Joe Malozzi. In my opinion, The Prodigal was an episode which justifies all of the merits of Fan Fiction, and embodies the responsibilities of the writer, (Official show, or Fan Fic Writer).
After watching that, I don't even know if I want to watch the rest of the season. There are many people singing Cark Binder's praises over The Prodigal (he wrote it), but I actually find myself disturbed by it... and equally as disgusted. Whereas until this point he seemed to have held out against network pressures as much as he could and still have a job, in The Prodigal he finally lost it. Sold out to those network pressures - for a network that must already have known that they were going to cancel the show - that wouldn't allow Teyla to 'go to the dark side' as I'm sure they thought everyone would see it.
It is not, and it would not have been... and I firmly believe that it is something that she could, perhaps would have done. Consider, she's prepared to work with the Wraith, the mortal enemy of her people - to become one of them, even, for the good of the people of the Pegasus galaxy. Teyla isn't stupid. She saw and heard how her very presence affected Michael and his actions, even in the short amount of time she was with him... how much more could she have done at his side. Yes - her son was the key to Michael's plans...
All these worlds filled with people, busying themselves with their pathetic lives. They come and they go, they live and they die and the galaxy is no better for it. But your son – your son will be an instrument of change. He will be remembered for the ages. (Search and Rescue - Martin Gero)
...she asks him, what of the mother well... The Prodigal should have been her answer. The Mother could have redeemed everything, perhaps even Michael himself... if only she (and the writers) had had the courage.
Teyla questions Michael's sense of justice at killing so many, she knows that what he did, he did to survive. (Allies, Vengeance) and yet, still she accuses him for his motives, and then... when she has him there, dangling from the ledge, calling out her name - which I believe was not just a plea to save him from falling, but from so much more - In. Cold. Blood... she murders him. She truly shows in that moment that she was no different to Michael, in fact, she's worse, because it was no longer a fight for survival. Teyla from the first four seasons would never had acted in such a morally reprehensible way. She would have wanted justice, yes... but the right kind of justice.
And I'm sorry, but, I believe by that point you can forget the whole sorry question of a 'mother bear' protecting her young, that's been bandied about as the excuse for her behaviour. By that point in the show it's no longer germane... it ended when Michael told her he already had Torren's DNA and if she came to him he would turn off the self destruct and leave the city with him... because she would have done. She knows Michael well enough, has a connection with him (what happened to that, btw? Gone the way of the Wraith Telepathy, I'll warrant), enough that she would have no reason to doubt his sincerity. She's felt his emotions, when he asks her to go with him, and she has the evidence of his word that he'll harm neither of them. She woke, her son was there, and he was fine. If Michael was going to harm him, he would have done so before she woke. So no - that excuse no longer stands, or is at best fatally flawed.
For me, sadly, Atlantis (the show anyways) has blown it. The Prodigal was a big thumbing of the nose to all those who vilify Fan Fiction. In this instance... in this fan, and this writer's opinion - the writers on the show have been subsumed by the network ideals too much to write any longer with integrity. They have compromised themselves, they have compromised their characters, and have - unfortunately - taken a cowards' route out. But I must also thank them - because they gave the Fan Fiction writers out here so very much to work with.
And I... at least... intend to do so.
Today, I have had it irrevocably spelled out for me that I could never write for a network television show... and I'll be surprised if I ever get published - why?
Because I won't compromise.
I have been sitting here today trying to put into words just how I feel, right now, over the question of what /is/ a writer's responsibility.
Is it to bow to pressures of a society that seeks to be entertained only by a 'fluffy bunny,' 'black and white,' 'comfortable' view of a world where there are no monsters under the bed, and we're not faced with moral questions that might alarm us when we see our answers?
Or is a writer's responsibility to her characters, their integrity, and the integrity of the world/society they write.
Is it a writer's responsiblity to challenge us as readers (of any kind of text, be that literary/visual/audio etc) - to hold up the mirror before our faces that prompts us to see within those dark corners of our own beliefs, attitudes and psyches, and make us think and to make us realise, as we examine the villain, Wait a minute - I understand - and there but for the grace of God, go I.?
Is it a writer's responsibility to remind us that the world is not a fluffly place, but that in spite of that, there is still hope?
Is it a writer's responsiblity to remind us that the answers to moral questions aren't 'black and white,' but that in spite of that, there is still hope?
Is it a writer's responsibility to remind us that, actually, there are monsters under the bed and that they could well be, likely are of our own making, but that there is still hope?
And should the writer hold up all of that to us and say, Look... I am the voice of your conscience, I have seen your actions, and your thoughts. I know you and can judge you, and find you wanting, but there is no cause for alarm - do not despair, because there is still hope.?
I believe the all of the latter.
There is only one TV show I could name that consistently, through all its incarnations, was not afraid to do that - to challenge us, to hold the mirror to us, to shake us from our comfortable complaceny and to make us think. That show is Star Trek.
They did it consistently, and they did it well, and still, at the end of each dark night they took us through, made us face, they left us with the message that, yes, there is still hope, but that it is our responsibility to take that potential and shape it, embrace it, make it ours.
They did it in The Original Series, they did it in The Next Generation, they did it with bells and whistles in Deep Space Nine, they did it less well in Voyager, but they still did it, and yes... they even did it in Enterprise toward the end - but then what happened? The show got cancelled.
Is it a symptom of the sickness in our society that we, as a people, given the choice would turn our back on anything and everything that holds that Mirror Darkly up to our faces and demands Look! - that we abrogate the responsibility for our own morality and moral choices - everything that proves our humanity - to others, whom we then revile?
Give us more shows like Star Trek, Writers - challenge us. Shock us from our moral apathy! Show us the real world through your art.
Last night, Stargate: Atlantis, one of the shows that created for us a wonderful 'dark mirror,' with such potential for the kind of examination of ourselves that I fear we need, finally capped its consistent failure to do so. I know there are many who will read this paragraph and tell me, "Yes, but that's not the kind of show it is. They don't write like that." and while I acknowledge that, know that you're right, and hate that it's true - I still had hope.
While the episode was exciting, tense, and contained a lot of good lines, there were too many occasions where the characters displayed stupidity, or in the end were just so out of character, on many levels, that in the end it lessened the impact of the episode.
I truly believe that, in the end, the ultimate victory in this, is Michael's. He proved his point. We're not that different, and in that it made his end that much more ignominious and disrespectful.
The episode treated him badly.
I suppose I'm somewhat biased. I've never really been able to see Michael as a 'villain' in the classic sense of the word. More like and antagonist, perhaps I'd even go so far as to say an 'anti-hero.'
There's been a lot of discussion about the rights or wrongs, merits or otherwise of Fan Fiction on the blog of one of the producers of SGA - Joe Malozzi. In my opinion, The Prodigal was an episode which justifies all of the merits of Fan Fiction, and embodies the responsibilities of the writer, (Official show, or Fan Fic Writer).
After watching that, I don't even know if I want to watch the rest of the season. There are many people singing Cark Binder's praises over The Prodigal (he wrote it), but I actually find myself disturbed by it... and equally as disgusted. Whereas until this point he seemed to have held out against network pressures as much as he could and still have a job, in The Prodigal he finally lost it. Sold out to those network pressures - for a network that must already have known that they were going to cancel the show - that wouldn't allow Teyla to 'go to the dark side' as I'm sure they thought everyone would see it.
It is not, and it would not have been... and I firmly believe that it is something that she could, perhaps would have done. Consider, she's prepared to work with the Wraith, the mortal enemy of her people - to become one of them, even, for the good of the people of the Pegasus galaxy. Teyla isn't stupid. She saw and heard how her very presence affected Michael and his actions, even in the short amount of time she was with him... how much more could she have done at his side. Yes - her son was the key to Michael's plans...
All these worlds filled with people, busying themselves with their pathetic lives. They come and they go, they live and they die and the galaxy is no better for it. But your son – your son will be an instrument of change. He will be remembered for the ages. (Search and Rescue - Martin Gero)
...she asks him, what of the mother well... The Prodigal should have been her answer. The Mother could have redeemed everything, perhaps even Michael himself... if only she (and the writers) had had the courage.
Teyla questions Michael's sense of justice at killing so many, she knows that what he did, he did to survive. (Allies, Vengeance) and yet, still she accuses him for his motives, and then... when she has him there, dangling from the ledge, calling out her name - which I believe was not just a plea to save him from falling, but from so much more - In. Cold. Blood... she murders him. She truly shows in that moment that she was no different to Michael, in fact, she's worse, because it was no longer a fight for survival. Teyla from the first four seasons would never had acted in such a morally reprehensible way. She would have wanted justice, yes... but the right kind of justice.
And I'm sorry, but, I believe by that point you can forget the whole sorry question of a 'mother bear' protecting her young, that's been bandied about as the excuse for her behaviour. By that point in the show it's no longer germane... it ended when Michael told her he already had Torren's DNA and if she came to him he would turn off the self destruct and leave the city with him... because she would have done. She knows Michael well enough, has a connection with him (what happened to that, btw? Gone the way of the Wraith Telepathy, I'll warrant), enough that she would have no reason to doubt his sincerity. She's felt his emotions, when he asks her to go with him, and she has the evidence of his word that he'll harm neither of them. She woke, her son was there, and he was fine. If Michael was going to harm him, he would have done so before she woke. So no - that excuse no longer stands, or is at best fatally flawed.
For me, sadly, Atlantis (the show anyways) has blown it. The Prodigal was a big thumbing of the nose to all those who vilify Fan Fiction. In this instance... in this fan, and this writer's opinion - the writers on the show have been subsumed by the network ideals too much to write any longer with integrity. They have compromised themselves, they have compromised their characters, and have - unfortunately - taken a cowards' route out. But I must also thank them - because they gave the Fan Fiction writers out here so very much to work with.
And I... at least... intend to do so.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-11-08 09:16 pm (UTC)Hmmm, as I was reading your comments about how you can show multiple moral equations I kept wondering if you had watched Star Trek, specially DS9 so I was glad when I got to that part. I think they did it really well. Another great one for that was Babylon 5. Heroes tries, but... Well, they're just not very good at it. I do think there are other, non sci-fi shows that play with it from time to time as well, but I can't really think of any offhand.
That said, I disagree with you about this last ep of SGA.
By that point in the show it's no longer germane... it ended when Michael told her he already had Torren's DNA and if she came to him he would turn off the self destruct and leave the city with him
snip
She's felt his emotions, when he asks her to go with him, and she has the evidence of his word that he'll harm neither of them
In the ep itself as the countdaown reached 2 minutes she radioed him that she was willing to go with him so long as he turned off the countdown and allowed Atlantis to survive. His response was that she disappointed him and he rejected her offer, leaving her to die because he was unwilling to not destroy Atlantis. So, when she killed him at the end, I don't have any problem with her doing that because at that point any empathy, any reason she might have to think she could influence him away from his madness was moot. He was bent on revenge and she would not be able to stop him. Additionally, he's been good at escaping in the past and he now had Torren's DNA - she was taking no chances with the fate of the galaxy.
Personally - and this is entirely my opinion - I've never been sure her empathy was toward him as a person, but more she disapproved of what SGA did to him and the idea in general and as such viewed him as a victim. That changed as he made choices - his own choices to kidnap her people and experiment on them, kidnap Teyla for her unborn child, kill millions by releasing the Hoffan drug - those were very much choices he made that he didn't have and wasn't forced into. So, I don't see why she should be expected to empathetic to him at this point.
Look, I agree with the general idea that Michael was a victim of the SGA and their running amok in Pegasus without ever thinking of the consequences. I would have loved last week's ep to be less about saving money with flashbacks and having nothing really change because ultimately it was a power game and instead have it actually be a Hague-like situation where "our Heroes" finally understood what they had done as they played Ancient in Pegasus. I would have loved to it if the writers had an ep with an outside OC who would view SGA's actions through a non-heroic spotlight and felt that the first Michael ep did just that to devastating effect. There is a lot of room in SGA for playing with the question of right/wrong actions as it comes to SGA's decisions that influence so many with such little control over the decision process. And occassionally they've done it, so I know they could if they wanted to and the fact they don't makes me sad. Michael's storyline, though, once he came back as a villain that first time, was set in stone because he made bad choices that hurt people. It's not morally ambiguous, but then it couldn't easily be and have him be a true villain, however sympathetic his past may have made him.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-08 09:25 pm (UTC)I'm curious, genuinely, as to when you feel it was that Michael came back as a villain that first time? Are you talking Vengeance, or did you mean The Kindred?
Edit - and I forgot to say, yes... /Love/ DS9 and Star Trek in general. :)
no subject
Date: 2008-11-08 11:38 pm (UTC)Don't get me wrong, I love Michael, ship Teyla/Michael in my twisted way, and have always felt that the writers handled their plotline clumsily and inconsistently. But I don't understand why you think it would be all right for Teyla to embrace someone who has no qualms about killing hundreds of thousands of helpless civilians in order to realize his schemes for galactic conquest (far beyond anything he needed to do for his personal survival) and yet unforgivable that she should kill someone who by his own testimony will stop at no atrocity to conquer the galaxy and kill everyone she holds dear--and kill him in fair combat, no less. If Michael can heap massacre upon massacre of individuals whose sole offense was humanity, surely Teyla can kill someone who two seconds earlier was attempting to kill a close friend.
And please, please don't tell me that Teyla might have influenced him to be less brutal. First of all, he wasn't even willing to give up his plan--and keep his word--to have her. Second, the thought of Teyla fluttering around like an abused wife trying to soften the cruelty of her psychotic husband is nauseating. The idea that a woman should sacrifice herself to make a bad man less bad is straight out of the gender-pathology handbook.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-09 01:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-09 01:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-09 01:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-08 11:58 pm (UTC)I would say that by Kindred he was clearly a villain in that he was kidnapping innocent people to experiment on in an effort to both get revenge on Atlantis and also to dominate the galaxy. I'm trying to recall my feelings regarding him in Vengeance. I remember being appalled at his mad scientist schtick and when he left Teyla tied to a bed with a bug crawling up her - but I think in some ways I still felt that he was more an aggrieved party, because if I recall that's when he was talking about how he was neither fish nor fowl thanks to SGA's non-consensual experimentation on him. He was angry and lashing out, and certainly not using his scientific abilities in any good way, but... I don't remember if he was actually experimenting on innocent people or if he was experimenting in the lab and his creations got out and hurt people without his intent. If it's the former then I wouldn't consider him a villain, but I would consider him a bad guy because of how he treated Teyla if nothing else (and creating nasty monsters isn't high up on a good guy's list usually either). If he actually was experimenting on villagers, then I would say that's when he went over the deep end into villainy.
I think, for me, a villain is not just someone who harms other people but one who does so for personal profit or pleasure. At times, there are "good guys" who do bad things with good intentions and there are "bad guys" who accidentally do good things with bad intentions. A villain is someone who does bad things with the either the intent to harm or not caring if s/he does so because it is part of a larger plan. A villain is more than a misguided former victim, which kind of what I felt Michael still was in Vengeance, a villain is someone with a far reaching plan who knowingly implements it even though it hurts others. Maybe if Michael had contained his plans toward Atlantis only I would still have had sympathy for him because they really did destroy his life, but he knowingly killed millions of innocents with the Hoffan drug and kidnapped Teyla's people. That's where he went from bad guy to villain.
Star Trek is awesome! I waver between my love for DS9 and their complex stories and my love for classic Trek, with the cheesy sets and compellingly hopeful stories. After that comes TNG, Enterprise and Voyager (in that order). TNG I adored by the end, but had a lot of trouble getting into for the first couple of years, and Enterprise was ok the first half of the first season and then became actually good the last season or two. Voyager improved when Barbie of Borg showed up even though all my feminist instincts made me want to hurl things, but I never could get into it much because I thought it could be so much better then it was given they were off in the far reaches of space and had to make very hard decisions based on limited resources and information.
Sometimes you kind of want the good guys to make bad decisions and have to deal with the consequences because it's how they answer to their bad decisions that really shows their character. And it raises the point that even heroes aren't perfect, that flawed people can still be heroes even when they make mistakes, etc. That's where SGA has failed for the most part, unfortunately - too few consequences explored for SGA characterization.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-09 12:00 am (UTC)Doh - if it's the latter he's not a villain... Bad re-reading before posting...
no subject
Date: 2008-11-09 01:08 am (UTC)Yes, Star Trek is awesome... for me it's kind of Enterprise and DS9 on an equal footing... then the others on a kind of equal footing (btw love the Barbie of Borg comment).
Agree with the concequences thing...