What You Want, Not What You Need
Aug. 23rd, 2013 03:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shapinglightWhich, yeah, does happen to be the title of the last arc in the Angel & Faith comic, but :shrug: it fits this post.
More musings within on how nothing is new in fandom, or among comics/TV show writers. Contains spoilers for True Blood and for the Buffy comics.
Joss Whedon (in)famously said that you have to give the fans not what they want, but what they need.
I understand what he was getting at (while at the same time thinking it rather presumptuous of him to think he knows what the fans need. I mean, it's not like they all need the same thing, is it? Unless he means they all need a bloody good lesson in being careful what they wish for?) but I'm not sure I entirely agree with it.
Or, I agree with it in the sense that you can't let fan opinion influence the story you have to tell (except that I suspect even Joss did many times, whether he'll admit it or not), or at least you have to pay lip-service to not letting it.
On the other hand, you don't want to lose your audience, do you? So, before you decide to ignore those fan opinions, you might at least want to know what they are. Not just to assume that you know.
This post is brought on by reading several interviews with the current showrunner of True Blood, in which he tries to allay fears about the return of Alexander Skarsgard's character, Eric Northman, in season 7, given that he appeared to die a stupid, comedy death in the final episode of season 6. Needless to say, a lot of people were quite upset (yes, I was too, though I'm not in the TB fandom, just a lurker) and the fact that Eric was stark, full-frontal naked when he 'died' didn't mollify them much at all. In fact, it's rather insulting for anyone to think that it would have (shades of the 'women only like Spike for his abs' argument).
Must say, I came out of reading these interviews with the impression that this showrunner was just irritated by this section of the audience ("Why can't they just wait till next summer to find out?"), and resented having to placate them. But, see, I think that's him not so much wanting to tell his story how he wants to tell it, but conflating the audience's needs and their wants. He thinks their need should be to be surprised by the story next year. Is Eric dead, or isn't he? However, the fans might actually need to have a reason for tuning in again.
All these, can't you wait till next summer? kinds of remarks are aimed at general viewers who maybe aren't as emotionally invested. But you want to keep the more fannish viewers watching too, don't you?
Then again, you don't want to go promising something you have no intention of delivering on, the way the Dark Horse PTBs (and Joss) did about Spike/Buffy prior to season 9 of the Buffy comic. Joss said Spike and Buffy were 'gold' (he meant the snappy dialogue exchanges, I suspect), and Scott Allie promised the Spuffy fans their interaction would be worth waiting for. Well, apart from a few nice moments in early issues, their interaction turned out to be (yet another) kick in the teeth for the Spuffy 'shippers, to add to the ones they got (repeatedly) in season 8. So obviously, Dark Horse, Joss et al would have been better off (or more honest) if they'd just told people re Spuffy and Spike's role to 'wait and see.' But of course they knew that section of fans was extremely pissed off after season 8 and wanted to persuade them to keep reading.
Hmm. Think I'm going around in circles here. I think what I'm trying to say is, don't presume you necessarily know what your audience needs, do some research. Then, if you appear to kill off a much-loved character, at least you'll be prepared for the following shitstorm.
And if you do promise fans things in your upcoming stories, make damn well sure you deliver.
Fool me once, etc, etc.
ETA: It is of course possible to f**k up all the above so much that you end up giving the audience/readership neither what they want nor what they need. I think the Buffy comics are a case in point.
ETA 2: And of course that applies to all fan groupings, not just Spuffies, Bangels and other assorted weird 'shippers.
I suspect the use of the phrase 'tune in' really dates me.
More musings within on how nothing is new in fandom, or among comics/TV show writers. Contains spoilers for True Blood and for the Buffy comics.
Joss Whedon (in)famously said that you have to give the fans not what they want, but what they need.
I understand what he was getting at (while at the same time thinking it rather presumptuous of him to think he knows what the fans need. I mean, it's not like they all need the same thing, is it? Unless he means they all need a bloody good lesson in being careful what they wish for?) but I'm not sure I entirely agree with it.
Or, I agree with it in the sense that you can't let fan opinion influence the story you have to tell (except that I suspect even Joss did many times, whether he'll admit it or not), or at least you have to pay lip-service to not letting it.
On the other hand, you don't want to lose your audience, do you? So, before you decide to ignore those fan opinions, you might at least want to know what they are. Not just to assume that you know.
This post is brought on by reading several interviews with the current showrunner of True Blood, in which he tries to allay fears about the return of Alexander Skarsgard's character, Eric Northman, in season 7, given that he appeared to die a stupid, comedy death in the final episode of season 6. Needless to say, a lot of people were quite upset (yes, I was too, though I'm not in the TB fandom, just a lurker) and the fact that Eric was stark, full-frontal naked when he 'died' didn't mollify them much at all. In fact, it's rather insulting for anyone to think that it would have (shades of the 'women only like Spike for his abs' argument).
Must say, I came out of reading these interviews with the impression that this showrunner was just irritated by this section of the audience ("Why can't they just wait till next summer to find out?"), and resented having to placate them. But, see, I think that's him not so much wanting to tell his story how he wants to tell it, but conflating the audience's needs and their wants. He thinks their need should be to be surprised by the story next year. Is Eric dead, or isn't he? However, the fans might actually need to have a reason for tuning in again.
All these, can't you wait till next summer? kinds of remarks are aimed at general viewers who maybe aren't as emotionally invested. But you want to keep the more fannish viewers watching too, don't you?
Then again, you don't want to go promising something you have no intention of delivering on, the way the Dark Horse PTBs (and Joss) did about Spike/Buffy prior to season 9 of the Buffy comic. Joss said Spike and Buffy were 'gold' (he meant the snappy dialogue exchanges, I suspect), and Scott Allie promised the Spuffy fans their interaction would be worth waiting for. Well, apart from a few nice moments in early issues, their interaction turned out to be (yet another) kick in the teeth for the Spuffy 'shippers, to add to the ones they got (repeatedly) in season 8. So obviously, Dark Horse, Joss et al would have been better off (or more honest) if they'd just told people re Spuffy and Spike's role to 'wait and see.' But of course they knew that section of fans was extremely pissed off after season 8 and wanted to persuade them to keep reading.
Hmm. Think I'm going around in circles here. I think what I'm trying to say is, don't presume you necessarily know what your audience needs, do some research. Then, if you appear to kill off a much-loved character, at least you'll be prepared for the following shitstorm.
And if you do promise fans things in your upcoming stories, make damn well sure you deliver.
Fool me once, etc, etc.
ETA: It is of course possible to f**k up all the above so much that you end up giving the audience/readership neither what they want nor what they need. I think the Buffy comics are a case in point.
ETA 2: And of course that applies to all fan groupings, not just Spuffies, Bangels and other assorted weird 'shippers.
I suspect the use of the phrase 'tune in' really dates me.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-23 06:30 pm (UTC)They turned Giles into a twelve year old boy, because 'old Giles' wasn't 'relevant' any more.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-23 06:55 pm (UTC)It occurred to me recently as I was reading yet another ridiculous superhero comics plot that it seems like part of the problem with the Buffy and Angel comics is that they are being plotted by people who write superhero comics, where death is fluid and deaging is viable tactic to relaunch a character and a character unknowingly being a robot for a year or two just isn't that weird. I mean, you'd think Joss would know better, except of course he's a comics writer, too. It's like the comics sensibility overruled the TV/canon sensibility as soon as we changed media.
IDK. Does that sound way off-base? It just seems to me like the plotting in the Buffy comics is of a piece with what I'm reading in the Marvel books.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-23 07:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-08-23 07:53 pm (UTC)And even on a comic level they're just really, really badly written. Allie's unwillingness or inability to reign all of it in plays a part, but even for a comic they're bad. One story or arc seems to have nothing to do with the last.
The DHP Billy mini is just...off the wall incoherent with the S9 story, for instance.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-24 12:29 am (UTC)Yeah. It makes me sad that some Buffy fans who were new to the medium thought these comics were representative of comics at large. Obviously there are some terrible comics, but the good ones usually have interesting, sense-making stories, and characters that are relatable. Plus they look good. I'd say the Buffy comics are barely a journeyman effort, if that.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 09:50 am (UTC)I agree. I'd say the best thing they've done is to showcase Rebekah Isaacs' talent except that she drew Spike really badly.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 09:48 am (UTC)The rather 'pat me on the back for being brave enough to introduce a gay male character' vibe I get from this character also irritates me. You'd think Billy was the first such character in mainstream comics, when in fact Joss is way behind the times. Northstar from the X-comics came out as gay in 1992, and Apollo and the Midnighter and Apollo and the Midnighter had their first on-page kiss in 1999.
I often wonder if Jane E and Drew Greenberg are actually aware of this. Maybe, like so many of the Buffy comics readership, they're not mainstream comics readers and are unaware of this.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 11:03 am (UTC)Maybe, like so many of the Buffy comics readership, they're not mainstream comics readers and are unaware of this.
Could be. I don't know if I've ever heard Jane talk about comics and it doesn't appear that either have read the S9 comics. In that mini, tons of things just don't make sense. Of course they don't make sense with the show either, so par for the course.
*sigh* 2 more issues.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 11:37 am (UTC)Sorry for the typos in that comment, btw. I really should proof read.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 11:42 am (UTC)I'm the last person who can complain about typos. :P
no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 12:09 pm (UTC)Re: the subject of my post, btw, the True Blood furore, seems it's still ongoing. That showrunner, who I hadn't realised was a mid-season replacement (that's how in the fandom I am) has stirred a lot of shit with the way he's talked down to the fans.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 12:32 pm (UTC)I'm baffled by the love that thing gets from Spike fans. Also the love Paul Lee seems to be getting for the art. Different strokes, I guess, but I thought both were pretty bad. Not Jeanty bad, but not good either.
Replacements usually have issues with fanbases. Let me guess, he was a 'huge fan' of the show before stepping in? That's why I loathe it when people say that about new writers/producers. Fans have agendas. Always.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 03:18 pm (UTC)I suspect next season will be the last.
I don't understand the mini series love either, though in fact I've really only seen one person on Buffyforums defend it repeatedly. One person started off liking the first issue but then got very disillusioned when it became clear it wasn't going anywhere, and on Slayalive, most posters seemed to think it a boring waste of time.
Paul Lee drew a reasonably pretty Spike. That's about the best I can say. He's no Franco Urru, though. His backgrounds were really dull!
no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 05:04 pm (UTC)Probably. HBO shows don't usually last that long.
I can't bring myself to go to Buffy forums anymore. My only interaction with the mainstream fandom is by reading Leyki's reviews. I've seen a couple people on there hoping and praying for him to come back, but I guess it's just a small sample.
Are you getting the A&F issue early? Admittedly I'm curious if they have the guts to kill anyone who isn't an OC. I thought maybe Whistler, but I saw the preview and it looks more like they're setting up yet another "redemption" arc or whatever. Probably will be Nadira.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 06:26 pm (UTC)And no, I'm not getting an early issue this time. Everything's a day late over here because of the public holiday yesterday, so I won't get my copy till tomorrow.
I think Alasdair will die for sure, and possibly Whistler. I don't think they're going to kill anyone else. Probably not even Pearl.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-28 07:48 am (UTC)Sounds like you were right according to the early review. Still sounds like they've managed to make it trite and boring.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-28 09:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-08-28 02:12 pm (UTC)Yes, the bad guys died. Let's all shed a tear.
I have a feeling they're going to put Spike in the Angel book next time. They can't leave Angel alone and I don't see them shipping Gunn or Connor to London.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-28 02:41 pm (UTC)On the other hand, Victor Gischler was at the recent writers' summit at Joss's house. Why would he be along if they don't intend him to do something with Spike in season 10?
I actually don't know which I'd prefer. I thought the mini series was dull as ditchwater, and that Gischler managed to make Spike very unlikeable.
But, as you know, I wasn't too keen on A&F 19 and 20.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-28 02:55 pm (UTC)I dunno. Maybe they'll move Gage over to Buffy. Or they'll have alternating writers like S8. I just can't imagine them leaving Angel by himself and Spike is the most logical choice. Well, not most logical, but the best bet of sales since the Angel/Spike duo was popular.
I wonder if they'll have Giles back in the main title. They've already got more characters than they know what to do with.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-28 04:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-08-28 04:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-08-28 04:41 pm (UTC)I agree it was very sappy.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2013-08-24 03:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-08-27 09:51 am (UTC)Yeah, he's not up to much.