[PREV - ORIGIN] [TOP]
SMUDGED
May 05, 2010
I think that this is yet another August 19, 2013
syndrome, a common recourse of the
popular author of series fiction:
The writer begins getting self-conscious about
the repititious interactions of the characters.
Aren't real human being more complex than this?
The stupid are rarely this *perfectly* stupid,
the smart are rarely this *consistently* smart.
Few are quite as good as the good guy, or as
bad as the bad guy.
The obvious response to that
thought is to toss in some
exceptions, to write a story
where the good guy screws up, or I tend to think of this syndrome
the bad does something good, etc. as "the meathead acts dumb", a
reference to the later episodes
You might call this an of "All in the Family".
application of the rule
of reversals, applied to I'd rather find a better
nominally continuous canonical example... I keep
characters. seeing things through the
lens of dubious television
I suspect it shows a shows that I just happen to
confusion about what be familiar with because of
romantic fiction is my age.
about, an injection
of an inappropriate There's no reason I know of
realism. *you* should be familiar
with Archie Bunker dueling
It's a move toward "more with The Meathead, certainly
complex" characters, but not if you're much younger
if it's so formulaic it than I am, or developed a
just smears the portraits habit of ignoring television
without adding detail. sooner than I did.
A character's flaws arise This was a 70s attempt
out of their character, at being an edgy,
and while all may be relevant sitcom,
flawed, each is flawed an intergenerational
in different ways. "odd couple" where
a red neck father-in-law
argues with a long-haired
son-in-law incessantly.
LIKE_EVIL
--------
[NEXT - SECOND_MURDER]