HIGHLA-L Digest - 20 Aug 2001 to 21 Aug 2001 (#2001-243)
Automatic digest processor (LISTSERV@LISTS.PSU.EDU)
Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:00:05 -0400
There are 2 messages totalling 90 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. criticizing characters (was Re: CAH and the down-slide of HL) (2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:15:06 -0400
From: Sandy Fields <diamonique@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: criticizing characters (was Re: CAH and the down-slide of HL)
Reaching way back to respond to Lisa's interesting post. A couple of days
before a con we should be talking Highlander! :-)
At 11:41 AM 07/20/01, Lisa Kadlec wrote:
>I was wondering aloud about 1) why people who seem to pretty much *hate*
>Duncan would keep watching the show,
This is something I've often wondered about too. I can certainly
understand having a preference for one of the supporting characters in a
show -- even one who doesn't appear regularly -- over the lead
character. I can't understand watching a show on a regular basis when you
hate the lead character. It's a pretty good bet that this character will
be in almost every scene of every episode. And if he/she isn't in the
scene, whatever is going on still revolves around and/or refers to the lead
character. The show is about this character, and everything that is done
or said to or by the other characters is for the purpose of further the
lead character's story. So... if I hated that character, I couldn't see me
watching the show every week.
Now... there are some characters that we love to hate (Horton for
instance), but that's a different story. That's not the kind of hate I'm
referring to here; and I'll assume it's not the kind of hate Lisa was
referring to. I'm talking about hate like the way I felt about
Charlie. Gawd I loathed that character. He was like fingernails on a
chalkboard to me. There is absolutely no way I'd watch a show in which
Charlie was the lead character... no matter *who* they put as supporting
characters.
> and 2) from whence comes a tendency I've observed, over time, for people
> to be talking about the virtues of character X and then bring in
> seemingly random comments about how inadequate Duncan is, as if somehow
> tearing him down is required in order to build up someone else.
This is something I began to observe back in early 97. I remember having a
conversation with Linda Wyatt about this in Baltimore. I thought it was
quite strange. Knowing how much of a Duncan/Adrian fan I am, people were
surprised to find that I was a member of the PWFC and that I thought Methos
was a wonderful character, and casting Peter in the role was a stroke of
genius. Some folks couldn't understand how I could like Methos if I were
such a fan of Duncan.
I never understood why they didn't understand. Both are great characters
(more kudos to the writers) played by very good actors (see ya soon, guys!
<g>). What's not to like? I've never felt the need to tear one down in
order to express my support for the other. I've never felt the need to use
a negative comment about one person or character in order to make another
person or character look good. Not necessary IMO.
All of the HL actors were very good (except Joan Jett... blech!), and the
characters were all wonderfully written.
-- Sandy
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:39:46 EDT
From: RED57@aol.com
Subject: Re: criticizing characters (was Re: CAH and the down-slide of HL)
My fellow Listanistas,
In a message dated 01-08-21 19:21:13 EDT, you write:
> All of the HL actors were very good (except Joan Jett... blech!), and the
> characters were all wonderfully written.
Hey, you forgot Slan (I can't believe I thought it was cool to cast Richard
Moll at one time).
Ginny...no kidding!
RED57@aol.com
Cluephone for kooks and trolls: {S Ring}
"Attention! You are gave 1 minutes Eastern Standard Time
for total abandonment of vicinity! Counting! 9, twelve, 2, several..."
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 20 Aug 2001 to 21 Aug 2001 (#2001-243)
***************************************************************