Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT 2912 to 2916 (9-13 March 2015)
grez:
--- Quote from: cesariojpn on 09 Mar 2015, 13:56 ---
--- Quote from: ASB84 on 09 Mar 2015, 05:49 ---The issue of readers having unrealistic expectations of perfection has been brought up a couple of times in the past week. That's not why there are objections to the way certain characters are handling their business. When we consume fiction and react to fictional characters, we're (generally) not holding them to an unrealistic standard of perfection, but we do compare them to the real world, particularly when the characters are well-rounded, realistic, and relate-able.
To that end, we don't ask them to be perfect, but we do ask: are their actions, attitudes, and motives understandable? Reasonable? Sympathetic? That's what shapes our reactions to the characters and their role in the plot.
--- End quote ---
We can't ask fictional characters to not be perfect. Then again, we can't ask the creator of said characters to bend to the whim of the fandom. HOWEVER, said creator obviously cannot ignore the fandom that have genuine criticism and gripes about how a story or characters are progressing.
--- End quote ---
Err... yes, yes they can. The criticism can be genuine and the gripes can be gripey, but the creator can ignore whatever the heck they want to. It may not be wise - it may even be stupid in some cases - but it's their right as creator to bend, break, mish, mash, and do whatever to their story.
ASB84:
It's not about catering to the fanbase, though. It's about having characters that the audience becomes invested in and subsequently react to, in accordance with their own perceptions. I don't think anyone expects the cast of QC to always say or do the right thing - the strip would be pretty bland and boring if they did - but what the characters do still resonates with us the audience, and we evaluate the proceedings in accordance to what we each find understandable, reasonable, and sympathetic.
Sometimes there's multiple layers to that. Take Sven's recent appearance, for instance. It's understandable and reasonable that he'd develop romantic feelings for Faye, and we can sympathise with the fact that it causes him some confusion as he finds himself in unfamiliar territory. However, his attitude towards the situation, perception of himself as the protagonist of a romantic comedy, and expectations of Faye are not reasonable and do not make him sympathetic. Arguably understandable, given he's uncharacteristically out of his depth, but it fails on the other counts.
ReindeerFlotilla:
John Grisham.
I should explain.
IMO, Grisham's protagonists have been uniformly detestable people. I was once trapped in a dull place with nothing to keep my sanity but a stack of his novels. I finished none of them.
I could argue that Grisham had failed in the characterization department. Except, best selling author, a multitude of film adaptations.
You simply can't argue that a characterization fails because you don't feel sympathy for the character's position. You can poll to find out if a supermajority finds the character wildly unrealistic or unreadable, but being unlikable is actually a valid way to be a character. Being addictively unlikabe is a kind of characterization super-combo finish.
I have never related to fictional Jerry Seinfeld, or Greg House, or Sherlock Holmes, or the Doctor, or Kara Thrace, or the Goddamn Batman. I'm not sure they are relatable characters. Each was (or is), in their own way, so the best at what they do, you expect something to go "snikt." They are watchable. Being watchable can cover for any amount of realism fail.
IMO, Marten had a watchable moment. Sven has been generally watchable. Every time he's skated close to relatability, he's done something to dance it back, but in a way the supported the humor of the comic. But all of that is opinion.
cesariojpn:
--- Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 09 Mar 2015, 15:08 ---The mods are hypervigilant about some issues. If there's a complaint about the "clever girl" picture it will disappear again.
I'm not up on meme meanings but something disquieting came up when I researched it.
--- End quote ---
Oh, you saw the ED and Know Your Meme articles about the strip, huh? Like the one that makes fun of the room myself.
--- Quote from: ReindeerFlotilla on 09 Mar 2015, 17:35 ---You simply can't argue that a characterization fails because you don't feel sympathy for the character's position.
--- End quote ---
I point to Clariten as a counter-argument to this. The strips we've been given concerning Clariten have been devoid of info of why Marten has gone from a string of failed relationships with Females to him going out with a Transgendered person. It's pretty much "I like you, let's go out." Okay, WHY?!?!?! Is he just sick and tired of being the whipping boy with females that he thinks maybe going non-traditional would be a better shot at happiness? Is it because his childhood with Veronica exposing him to alternative lifestyles kinda gave him a more open mind when it comes to such things? Or some other obtuse reason?
ASB84:
--- Quote from: ReindeerFlotilla on 09 Mar 2015, 17:35 ---You simply can't argue that a characterization fails because you don't feel sympathy for the character's position.
--- End quote ---
I never did.
I was talking about our reaction as readers, and the "What, do you expect (character) to be perfect?" argument that's come up a few times in the past week or so. I doubt anyone's holding the characters to that kind of standard, but our reactions from behind the fourth wall are still driven by how we perceive their words, actions, and motives. We may not always agree with their decisions and course of action, but we can understand it, see reason in it, sympathise with it.
Of course, that's stretching it out and breaking it down in a lengthier manner than we do when we're reading the comics. We make that analysis in an instant, deciding whether or not we agree with a character, and even if we don't, whether we can at least see their point of view. I'm not talking about the quality of the character, whether it succeeds or fails; in fact, if a character is eliciting a response from the audience, I think they're successful by default. I'm talking about our reactions to characters, how they push our buttons, whether we're cheering or jeering them, what we think of the things they're saying and doing when there's a grey area. Reactions to the events of the story and how it makes us feel, not whether we think the characters succeed or fail from a narrative point of view. That's another discussion entirely, as is whether or not the characters are entertaining (or as you said, watchable).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version