Home

Previous Entry | Next Entry

fia
As I understand it, the writers and producers and such are not allowed to read fan fiction, because there is a risk of being sued for Anonymous Fan Fiction Author #17's "intellectual property" if something that is read somehow, accidentally finds its way into a script. (However, stealing from every other Sci-Fi show in existence is perfectly okay, because everyone does it and it's impossible to tell who first had any given idea.)

So my incredibly biased, rude theory is that they write their own. They call them, oh, screenplays that didn't make it to production, or deleted scenes, something like that. Their own wank-material, in which the socially inept television writer astrophysicist gets the hot intern cute botanist and gives it to her, but good. And then they forget that didn't actually happen on the show, so in their own personal versions of canon, Rodney and Katie were totally getting it on. They don't identify with Ronon as much, so they forget to write their little fap-fap piece about the big, scary Satedan and the cute new head of medicine. Until there's a new intern with great boobs the socially inept astrophysicist is put into close proximity with the cute new head of medicine, and then they go, "Heeeeey..." and it starts all over again.

It all comes down to the Stargate writers' inability to follow that all-important rule, "show, don't tell." They told us Rodney and Katie were together, and we didn't see it -- we couldn't, because it wasn't there -- but we went, "Huh... okaaaay, if you say so." They showed us Ronon and Jennifer doing a significant amount of emotional bonding, and then literally laughed at us for assuming there was a relationship there, because they didn't tell us it was.

This, in my not-so-humble opinion, is their only sound argument against slash. Particularly of the McKay/Sheppard variety. They've showed us again and again the close-knit emotional bond between Rodney and John, to the point that even my slightly-homophobic mother wonders if they aren't just a little queer (she wonders the same of Jack and Daniel) but they haven't told us they're together. And as long as they keep showing us one thing and telling us another, they can keep believing what they're telling us. I say let them believe it. But I also say that they need to learn a little bit more about effective storytelling, because if people who don't even watch the show frequently are getting that the two male leads are making with the Brokeback love offscreen...



For once I was actually pleased with a relationship being shoved down my throat presented by the Stargate PTB. I hated Daniel Jackson/Vala Mal Doran. I hated Rodney McKay/Katie Brown. I still hate Jack O'Neill/Sam Carter and John Sheppard/Teyla Emmagan. But I actually kind of liked Ronon/Jennifer, despite being, on the whole, thoroughly irritated with Keller as a character. They were cute, and we were actually given a glimpse of them connecting.

My hatred for the aforementioned pairings is not based solely in my love of slash; on the contrary, my love of slash is based on chemistry between characters as presented on the screen by the actors. My hatred of these pairings is based in how they are presented. (Well, I can't really speak for Daniel/Vala, to be fair. I am still boycotting most of seasons nine and ten of Stargate: SG-1 because of a deep-seated revulsion to Vala Mal Doran in general, and an inability to deal with her on-screen for more than twenty minutes without going into fits of irritation.) John is unable to even hug Teyla without looking like he wants to quantum-leap out of his body. Rodney was as awkward with Katie after year of supposed off-screen dating as he was during her first on-screen appearance. Sam, an intelligent, empowered military woman, becomes a bubble-headed, weak-willed pod person whenever the possibility of a relationship with Jack crops up. If you have to make a character something other than who they are to make a relationship 'work,' it's either bad writing, or it's bad matchmaking. Probably both.

So Ronon/Jennifer worked for me, in that the writers presented an episode in which they connected emotionally (if not physically; darn smoochus interruptus) and the actors presented believable chemistry. I thought it was going to be the first canon 'ship that didn't make me want to at best, cringe, and at worst, gouge out my eyes, every time the couple in question was on screen together. Then the Powers That Be decided anyone who bought into the Ronon/Jennifer pairing was a fool because they didn't say anything about them dating in the time between episodes (which, for us, was two weeks, but apparently for the Lanteans, was several months, though no passage of time was noted in dialogue or other markers, like the size of Teyla's bump, as she was conspicuous in her absence.)

Did I miss the issuance, at the start of the series, of psychic hats which allow us to read the minds of the production team? No? Good. It is the writers' responsibility to communicate things like relationship development and the passage of time to the fans through the media of the program itself not through snide comments about said fans in online blogs. In case you've forgotten, PTB, we're (mostly) intelligent human beings, and it's the fans whose continued support ensures your continued paycheck. You should learn to treat us with a modicum of respect, both onscreen and off.

Comments

[info]tejas wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 06:49 pm (UTC)
You haven't missed much with Vala. Aside from watching her sexually harass everyone in sight (and get away with it) and turn into a pedophile-fetishist's wet dream. (Dress a grown woman in barely there little girl clothes and have her sexually harass people - right. I guess TPTB think it's sexy... I think it's really REALLY creepy.)

M&M are losers of the first water.
[info]fiareynne wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 07:13 pm (UTC)
Agreed. Vala's behavior and attire has always creeped me out; it's one of the reasons she irritates me so much.

And people are saying Rodney's a pig and a sexual harassment suit waiting to happen for suggesting Carter show those kids her boobs to bribe them to get help? He was just being pragmatic, really. He did explain his reasoning - "I was a ten year old boy once."

Just because Vala's not from Earth doesn't mean she doesn't know any better or should be excused. Having a different set of bits between her legs is no excuse, either.
(no subject) - [info]tejas - Feb. 13th, 2008 07:19 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]fiareynne - Feb. 13th, 2008 07:46 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]tejas - Feb. 13th, 2008 08:46 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]tejas - Feb. 13th, 2008 08:50 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]inkspottedtea - Feb. 13th, 2008 10:20 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]fiareynne - Feb. 13th, 2008 10:27 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]ariadne83 - Feb. 14th, 2008 03:35 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]inkspottedtea - Feb. 14th, 2008 04:58 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]ariadne83 - Feb. 14th, 2008 08:37 am (UTC) Expand
[info]secondalto wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 06:50 pm (UTC)
So much WORD.
[info]tejas wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 06:53 pm (UTC)
Oh, and they're apparently not too bright, either. We didn't just fall off the turnip truck here. Some of us have been decoding television and other fiction longer than those two have been *alive*.
[info]paper_tzipporah wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 07:09 pm (UTC)
It's funny, the addition of Vala is actually what makes SG-1 MORE watchable for me, because I spend most of the first five seasons or so cringing at the way the writers deal with sex/sexuality/gender dynamics. I'm not sure the moralistic attitude IMPROVES after Vala joins the cast, but it does get a LOT more interesting.

And yes. Carter, oh GOD. This is why I liked Pete, even though the actor annoyed me. At least he wasn't a condescending alien or her superior officer.
[info]fiareynne wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 07:19 pm (UTC)
More importantly, Carter was still witty, intelligent and strong when she was with Pete.

Watching Vala, to me, is like watching the most unappealing porn you can possibly imagine, at great length. The kind where the people involved are acting out fetishes you don't subscribe to, look completely disinterested in one another, the act, and indeed breathing in and out, and they're just too pretty and plastic to be genuinely sexy. And it goes on for nearly TWO SEASONS, just kind of... making you feel incredibly uncomfortable when you ought to be enjoying yourself.

Edited at 2008-02-13 07:54 pm (UTC)
[info]adafrog wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 07:31 pm (UTC)
Snide comments in blogs? Besides the Cater/Jack insinuation that was going around?

I actually liked Vala. But that may be a lot of me imagining how cool she could really have been had they used her right.
[info]fiareynne wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 07:43 pm (UTC)
There was an insinuation on the part of Joe Mallozzi that those who had bought into the Ronon/Jennifer relationship (and were therefore somewhat surprised and confused by her asking Rodney out for a drink, which may have been intended to sound like a friendly drink, but actually sounded more like a date-drink) were being foolish, because several months had passed between 'Quarantine' and 'Trio,' and Ronon and Keller hadn't even kissed, so obviously there was no relationship there despite their obvious attraction and bonding.

When did we first see Rodney kiss Katie? (Actually, did we even see Rodney and Katie kiss, or have I blocked it?)
(no subject) - [info]centim - Feb. 13th, 2008 08:28 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]fiareynne - Feb. 13th, 2008 10:29 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]amireal - Feb. 13th, 2008 10:35 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]fiareynne - Feb. 13th, 2008 10:43 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]adafrog - Feb. 14th, 2008 03:42 pm (UTC) Expand
[info]nakedwesley wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 08:34 pm (UTC)
I too was taken aback by Mallozzi's comment. Months have past? WTF? How are we supposed to gleen these things? and if the entire Rodney/Katie relationship could take place off screen I don't think it's much of a jump in logic to assume the same for Ronon and Jennifer. Especially since the ony time we've seen either of them since Quarantine was when Ronon went w/Sheppard in Outcast.

I don't think I would have minded Vala so much if I could have gotten past the little girl pigtails. Sorry Claudia, but you're a little too mature to really pull that off. I've missed quite a few eps of S9 and 10 so can't really judge her character.

I think both your rants are well founded.
[info]fiareynne wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 10:34 pm (UTC)
Thank you. Although I hadn't meant for it to come across as two separate rants, really. Ah well, as long as I still got my point across.

The important thing to remember about these jumps of logic is, apparently, that the people who produce and write Stargate do not operate under logic.
(no subject) - [info]nakedwesley - Feb. 14th, 2008 01:19 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]fiareynne - Feb. 14th, 2008 01:30 am (UTC) Expand
[info]mecurtin wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 09:50 pm (UTC)
Your analysis strikes me as sound. Mallozzi's comment about months having passed is just, excuse me, *stupid*.

I think it's [info]linabean who talks about SGA scripts being a lot like Kiddie Puppet Hour, only with paychecks.
[info]fiareynne wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 10:38 pm (UTC)
Well, if he can call us stupid for drawing reasonable conclusions from the information we're given, why shouldn't we call him stupid for thinking we're privy to the inner workings of his mind?

Kiddie Puppet Hour. That's priceless.
[info]purna wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 10:49 pm (UTC)
In my opinion, the lack of continuity in the Jennifer/Ronon thing was pure fuckup. There's an old saying about writing, that if there's a gun over the mantle in Act 1, it better go off by the end of the play. The Jennifer/Ronon bonding in Quarantine was a big ole gun over the mantle, but unfortunately it never went off. The gun just kind of disappeared, but suddenly there's a knife instead, and the PTB are trying to tell us that the gun was never there...see obviously it's a knife, what are you, sheltered? Pffft, not falling for that.
[info]fiareynne wrote:
Feb. 13th, 2008 10:58 pm (UTC)
Which is what I mean by showing us some respect, onscreen and off. You can't wave your hands and say, "Nothing to see here, move along!" when we all just watched the episode two weeks before and we know what we saw. And calling us stupid for having seen it doesn't endear them to me.
(no subject) - [info]purna - Feb. 13th, 2008 11:45 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]fiareynne - Feb. 14th, 2008 12:00 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]mckay_girl - Feb. 14th, 2008 08:57 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]fiareynne - Feb. 15th, 2008 12:02 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]purna - Feb. 15th, 2008 03:31 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]mckay_girl - Feb. 15th, 2008 05:18 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]ainaria - Feb. 16th, 2008 06:01 pm (UTC) Expand
[info]green_grrl wrote:
Feb. 14th, 2008 03:04 am (UTC)
Giant. Fat. Word. The Boys from Bridge are crap at writing relationships, and crap at "show, don't tell."
[info]fiareynne wrote:
Feb. 14th, 2008 03:40 am (UTC)
And to a certain degree, I can accept the telling... as long as it's happening on the screen. Every show has someone who plays Captain Exposition once in a while.

When it starts happening offscreen because the writers are either too lazy, too self-absorbed, or too disinterested in the show to make it happen onscreen, there's a serious problem that needs to be addressed. That, of course, will never happen, because it's the people in power who are perpetrating this particular offense.
[info]helenkacan wrote:
Feb. 14th, 2008 03:24 am (UTC)
DEFINITELY WORD.

Also,
But I also say that they need to learn a little bit more about effective storytelling, because if people who don't even watch the show frequently are getting that the two male leads are making with the Brokeback love offscreen...
Especially when the acting is so finely nuanced as Flanigan's is. Or as raw and transparent as Hewlett's (esp. in Doppelganger).

So, duh. Please, PTB, don't insult our intelligence. They can carry on with the veneer of an alleged storyline, but we can see what's in front of our eyes.

Exasperated hugs,
H.

[info]fiareynne wrote:
Feb. 14th, 2008 03:51 am (UTC)
The thing is that they're not just insulting our intelligence metaphorically. They've actually degenerated to -- in Joe Mallozzi's case -- insulting our intelligence in public blog posts, because we're not privy to the thought processes of the PTB.

Really, I think there's a lot more to the Stargate universe that we have no idea about, because it exists entirely in their heads and they're unwilling or unable to get it onto paper and then onto the screen. It's sad.
[info]ariadne83 wrote:
Feb. 14th, 2008 08:41 am (UTC)
I just remembered - didn't Ronon invite her to sit at the team table in the mess hall? And everyone made fun of him! His own team thought he was going out with her
[info]rissabby wrote:
Feb. 14th, 2008 12:54 pm (UTC)
I was thrown off by the 'months have gone by' comment too. I really thought it was two weeks because there was no indication to the contrary.

I wonder if we're at the beginning of a 'Jennifer's Choice'-type story-arch. It appears to me that she likes both Ronon and Rodney. Perhaps there hasn't been relationship development between Jennifer and Ronon because Ronon is thinking through whether he's ready to date again or not. And, the thing with Ronon seemed more like a 'moment', than an almost-culmination of something that's existed for a while.

Jennifer asking Rodney out for a drink seemed more like a next-step, in an established relationship. (one a lot more established than the Rodney/Katie thing ever was) They had worked together on healing Weir through nanites, he helped rescue her in Missing, and in Trio. She (gently?) mocked his hypochondriac tendencies in Missing and Quarantine, which let us know that she has a lot of professional contact with Rodney.

I really hate the idea of Rodney and Ronon competing for Jennifer. On the other hand, if the story was done well, i.e. not written for the 18-35 year old male demographic, there are some interesting angles. Do opposites attract, or is similarity better for a relationship? In someways, Jennifer is a less intense girl-Rodney. Smart kid back-story, non-athletic, plays the piano (except badly), started out sorta cowardly but is overcoming her fears, likes games... wow, now I'm convincing myself even though I'm a devoted McShepper.

I have to stop now. I'm getting a bit incoherent and I have chores left to do tonight. Interesting post though, thanks.
[info]briar_pipe wrote:
Feb. 15th, 2008 09:02 am (UTC)
Hm. I just don't think I'd buy a "Choice" arc, for 2 reasons. (This is not to say they wouldn't write one! I could make a career out of being wrong about what SGA writers are willing to do.)

First, Rodney: he's just as much in need of "time", at this point, as Ronon is, after breaking off his almost-engagement. And I don't see even him poaching if he realized Ronon liked someone. (Which might explain why jm had to declare ix-nay on the Ronon/Jennifer, because otherwise Rodney would come across as a bit more of an asshole than the ptbs usually like.)

Second, the relationship: Yes, Rodney and Jennifer have had lots of professional contact, but there's been no sparking between them in the process. I mean nothing. Rodney had more chemistry with Katie, despite seeming terrified he would break the poor girl. So it's going to take a hell of a lot to convince me of any romance at this point. Friendship, well, I can take this as the first step in that direction.

Thing is, the Ronon/Jennifer stuff was so nice because I finally felt like the character was being let out of the proverbial box. She'd started to spark, just a little. And I really don't want that to get flushed.

But I'm sure I'll be very, very wrong, and someone will tell me so publicly. -_-;;;
[info]ionaonie wrote:
Feb. 14th, 2008 09:40 pm (UTC)
All I say to that is EXACTLY.

You've said practically everything I've tired to ever say.

That's always been my problem with Rodney/Katie and Sheppard/Teyla or Elizabeth. They say it, but they never show us any kind of emotional connection between those who they think should be in a relationship. On the other hand, the bonds between Rodney/John are there for all to see.

And yeah, they finally get a possible relationship that I might not hate, Ronon/Keller, obviously, and they try to tell us it's all in our minds. Charming.

So, yeah, totally with everything you say.
[info]miera_c wrote:
Feb. 14th, 2008 10:18 pm (UTC)
I don't think Sheppard/Weir has ever been "canon" even remotely. The actors themselves have said there was never the least romantic angle to the scenes. Unlike John/Teyla which has been brought up specifically both in scripts and by the actors & writers.


(no subject) - [info]ionaonie - Feb. 14th, 2008 10:49 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]miera_c - Feb. 15th, 2008 02:33 am (UTC) Expand
[info]wesleysgirl wrote:
Feb. 14th, 2008 09:57 pm (UTC)
Wow, I so, so agree. I mean, if they wanted us to buy that Rodney and Katie have been having this MEANINGFUL RELATIONSHIP all this time, would it have killed them to add little mentions of it here and there? We don't need, for example, whole scenes or episodes, but the occasional -- like, every third episode, or something -- mention of their spending time together, Rodney laughing over some cute thing she did, SOMETHING, would have been good.
[info]talula728 wrote:
Feb. 14th, 2008 10:22 pm (UTC)
Big Fat 'agree with you'.

On Vala- I haven't brought myself to expend energy or money to get season 10, mostly because of her. (and that's saying something for a fangirl like me).

On relationships. I agree that Ronon/Keller felt genuine because we saw them connect onscreen. But then they went and ruined it by saying it didn't exist. What the hell? They tell us things we don't see (Katie and Rodney) and then show us things that we're later told aren't there (Ronon and Keller).

I really didn't mind that Keller asked Rodney for a beer. Wasn't even a little crabby about it. She is a grown up and can ask friends out for beers, especially after harrowing experiences in which they saved her life. But to then respond and say that she never started a relationship with Ronon? Tis silly, I say. Silly with just a hint of insulting.
[info]deaka wrote:
Feb. 16th, 2008 04:13 am (UTC)
I thought it was hilarious that Mallozzi was calling stupid on people for failing to acknowledge what wasn't in the script. It's so typical of him. Condescension seems to be his response for just about everything.
[info]usomitai wrote:
Feb. 16th, 2008 11:46 pm (UTC)
Lovely post, and very well articulated.

I've read through some of the comments, but not all of them, so I'm not sure if this has been brought up, but: another example of Telling and Not Showing? Teyla's Mystery Lover Boy. She apparently was in love and we never knew until she got pregnant? Good development there, writers!
[info]fiareynne wrote:
Feb. 17th, 2008 12:11 am (UTC)
You are absolutely right, and I can't believe I left that out. Admittedly, they did make allusions to Teyla having a potential love interest in "Sunday," but at that point neither she nor her mystery man had acted on their feelings, and it was completely forgotten until suddenly her people disappear and oh by the way, she's knocked up.
[info]barefoot_chick wrote:
Feb. 18th, 2008 03:06 pm (UTC)
"Show, don't tell"

*nods* WORD.

They've showed us again and again the close-knit emotional bond between Rodney and John, to the point that even my slightly-homophobic mother wonders if they aren't just a little queer...

Rodney and John. So gay even straight people can see it.

I really like the idea of show, don't tell and the SGA ptb need to work on their follow-through. When exactly did Katie and Rodney hook up? I actually had no idea who she was. Teyla's pregnant? Huh? I was hoping her mystery man was Michael because, you know, they actually had screen time together.

I think the theory of show, don't tell is why I'm no longer much of a McWeir shipper. I used to be a hard-core McWeir fan, but ever since Elizabeth left, I'm switched off to the dark side of McShep. They have cookies and PONIES and gravity-defying hair and BOYS!

[info]not_sally wrote:
Apr. 21st, 2008 07:52 pm (UTC)
Love you. Wanted to get that out of the way first.

There are a lot of problems when it comes to writing in the Stargate 'verse, whether it's continuity, character development, or actually maintaining their freaking characters IN-character.

But it's one of the fandoms in which I usually hate het relationships between main characters.
It's because whenever they make Hero-guy fall for Heroine-girl, the girl always becomes... less. The girls on their own are capable, smart, kick ass. Yet some dude appears and they are dim-witted, damsels in distress.
It angers me quite a bit, because the 'verses are amazing, and there's no doubt we're incredibly invested in the characters. What's worse, it's not that they can't write romance, because there have been a few (just a handful, but hey! it's something) times were they made romantic relationships work. Though those always were main character/not-main character.

Anyways, I do love Vala (though that's probably a lot Claudia Black, too) and though her character was probably conceived as a fetish for fanboys, I think she managed to turn some of it around by being her awesome self.

I just wish the writers would pick a clue somewhere. They can do love. We've seen Teamness to an extent where OT4s and the like seem actually possible, the bond between the characters is so strong. So why is it they mess up when writing a simple kiss between a guy and a girl, yet they are apparently unaware most of us believe Rodney and John are a policy-change away from a commitment ceremony?
[info]librarianstales wrote:
Aug. 18th, 2008 05:00 pm (UTC)
I've just found this and I adore your essay. Even pimped it.

Profile

fia
[info]fiareynne
Fia "Non-Sequitur" Reynne
The Intersect

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow