Spoilers & Narrative

[gothwalk]

I've been mystified for most of my life by the way in which people object to spoilers. And over the last couple of days, I've seen some fine examples of giving out, complaining, and outright temper tantrums over Serenity spoilers. It's becoming clear to me that other people don't watch films - or plays, series, novels, or anything else like that - in the same way I do. And, to be perfectly honest, I'm starting to think they're missing out.

I take on anything that has a narrative in a non-linear - or at least multi-dimensional - way. I sit there, and I suspend disbelief at the same time as I take note of everything. The order that elements arrive in my mind is not as important as the gestalt - and there's definitely a gestalt. I'll flip forward in a novel, then go back a few pages and read a segment again. I'll read the entire script of a movie - and two fan-written alternates - before I see it. I'll listen to a recording of a symphony before I go to hear it played live. I'll happily read up on the history of a set-designer before I see a play (ok, haven't done that last in years, but the principle's there).

There's the argument that the event should be arrived at without prejudice, so that you see it all as the author intended it. Which I have to label nonsense, because there is no work in existence that is perceived as the author intended. You can't do it. You enter any work with your own pre-conceived ideas, stereotypes, archetypes, and concepts. The tragic figure may be amusing to you. The comic relief may be tragic in your mind. The awe-inducing scene at the beginning may bore you. You may hate the theme music, and think it anachronistic, even as the author thinks it sets the scene perfectly.

And I have to ask, if the linear arrival of the elements in your mind is so important, what about preludes, cut-scenes, flashbacks, multiple points of view? There are plenty of fantastic books and films out there that tell you the ending in the first scene. The obsession with remaining spoiler-free, as far as I can see, does nothing but inhibit the enjoyment of the event itself, and give you all sorts of hassle in the process.

About the only place where I can see the argument for remaining spoiler free is the first-person experience - the videogame, the RPG, the LARP, where the very point is that you don't know what's happening next. In any other case, you reduce your experience of the event by not preparing for it.

Although as it happens, I don't yet know the spoilers for Serenity. I'm not going to go looking for them, because I've done my speculating and am now content to wait, but if someone tells me, I won't be in the least worried - and I'll be reading transcripts of Firefly and Buffy, and interviews with Joss and the crew between now and then.

Comments

[silme.livejournal.com]

I don't mind spoilers either. How the actors perform the play or show, how the writer reaches the end, etc. is more important to me than what actually occurs.

[gaaneden.livejournal.com]

For TV shows, I really don't mind spoilers. For most movies, I don't mind them too much. But for a couple of movies, a spoiler will take away from the experience and sometimes make suspension of disbelief impossible. There are few movies that this happens with. The spoilers of Serenity are not ones that happen with the plot. The plot is pretty straight forward. It is what happens with the characters that made a different for me.

[silja.livejournal.com]

I agree with you. I respect others not wanting to see/hear about spoilers (Simon used to not even want to see the LotR trailers, even though he had read the book!!!), but I don't mind knowing what happens at all. In many ways, knowing makes me enjoy the book/ film more as I can concentrate on the details. Certainly, in mystery/ crime novels, I usually read the first chapter or two, then flip to the back to see who did it, then read the rest of the book.

[rowancat.livejournal.com]

Spoilers don't bother me, like you said, it's how good the film is.
I sometimes pick up a book i haven't read yet and flip through it
till i find a really interesting passage and then read forward and backwards
(to fill in the backstory) then eventually start reading from the beginning.

But it's amazing how different the same scene in the story reads and feels
when you read it both ways... and it's not just the lack of background info or the "story so far".
It often feels like two different books.
I like non linear films too... like "The Grudge"

[hobbitblue.livejournal.com]

I don't mind knowing some of the details, but i don't want to know how it ends, or what the major climactic moment entails. I don't know how much of a Star Wars fan you are but, surely the "Luke you are my father" moment would be less effective to the first-time audience if everybody already knew it? Don't you enjoy surprises and not knowing how a film will unfold? Its fun the *second time* (if a film is worth a re-watching) to follow how the various elements lead up to the dramatic conclusion, I really enjoyed doing that with Sixth Sense, but if I'd gone in knowing all about it I'd not have got that tingle up and down my spine when the penny dropped for the whole audience and everything suddenly shifted and re-cast itself to fit in with the new information...

[ailbhe]

Certainly, when I sat down to watch Star Wars for the first time ever, someone said "So, which episode is it where she turns out to be his sister?" and a big, shocking moment was spoiled for me.

Little revelations are a large part of what's fun when watching or reading something for the first time.

[ailbhe]

I was 20, and the kind of person you'd known for 6 years, and besides, I DIDN'T SAY IT WAS YOU. Since we're yelling and all.

[ailbhe]

I always got Star Wars and Star Trek mixed up though, so although I knew someone was the good guy's father, I was never sure which series it was in...

[mollydot.livejournal.com]

I'm glad I read that book last week....

[rowancat.livejournal.com]

Oh, films and books with major surprises and revelations are an exception certainly.
For those, i would definitely *not* want spoilers.
I do the "beware:spoilers" thing for common courtesy :)

[ratmmjess.livejournal.com]

Well, the objection comes because it is a common assumption/belief (even if you don't share it) that ruining surprises is a Bad Thing. Even if you don't mind having your surprises ruined, most people do, so it's only common courtesy not to spoil surprises. Which is why most people are irate; what they view as common courtesy is not being obeyed.

[phantom_wolfboy]

When I went to see Event Horizon, I thought it was going to be a sci-fi thriller. I was wrong. It was a horror film,

You misspelled "Horrible". ;-P

Sorry.

[kehoea.livejournal.com]

Thank you for that comment--you've made the world a little clearer to me.

I'm like our host in that I can approach a work from any direction and take roughly the same level of satisfaction from it. I've tended not to lately, because the linear approach takes less time and is totally valid in itself.

In a film, I pay more attention to the characters and visuals and get more from those aspects of it when I come across it half-way through; to understand the plot isn't necessarily possible at that point, so I only try it intermittently, and this gives more time to develop affection for the characters, to be charmed at a beautiful shot, etc.

But that people (women more than men, I suppose?) could routinely care enough about the characters in a novel--this is fiction, ffs! they are not living people!--that they wouldn't buy a book with a sad ending, that you say that you would have deprived yourself of reading an excellent book if you had known what a wrenching ending it has--wow, that surprises me. And emotion isn't absent for me when reading a book--there's a scene near the end of Zafón's _The Shadow of the Wind_ that brought tears to my eyes, from pity and anger at its inhumanity, for example--it just, evidently, is less routine and strong than for you and for these Mills & Boons readers.

As a counterpoint, I love Neal Stephenson's endings; I think they're true to life, I love that nothing ties up all the loose ends, I like seeing this mirroring of my own experience. Most people hate them, and I suppose this is out of strong affection for the characters involved? That "we" want to see them happy?

Also, that a chunk of the population avoids unhappy endings because of their emotional investment in the characters does make their near absence from Hollywood's productions sensible--personally, I'm often struck by the thought "The hero's going to survive, why should I care what happens in this fight scene? Or this chase scene? I feel like tuning out," and I'd enjoy movies in general more if there were more sad endings.

[gothwalk.livejournal.com]

You ever considered playing any RPGs? I'd be interested in drafting you for some of my campaigns when/if you're back in this country. :)

[kehoea.livejournal.com]

Well, not with you—-the cat looks good company, though ;-)

I thought about RPGs for a couple of weeks in first year in college, but encountered Dave Kearney and sundry other gamers, went drinking with them, really enjoyed it, and realised that if I took it up seriously I would probably fail college, or at least a few years of it. So I didn’t start, and made it through TCD in four years.

But sure, I’d be happy to give it a shot. Won’t be back in Dublin long-term until the first few months of next year at the very earliest, however.

[b-a-sheep.livejournal.com]

Well, I like being suprised, you know?

[microgirl.livejournal.com]

I'll flip forward in a novel, then go back a few pages and read a segment again. I'll read the entire script of a movie - and two fan-written alternates - before I see it.

Fine, that's you. You like that. That does not mean it is inherently more right or less stupid than those of us who prefer not to do it like that. And we have a right to be allowed experience things the way we would like to experience them, just as you are allowed read a book backwards if you want.

Which I have to label nonsense, because there is no work in existence that is perceived as the author intended.

No, you may not see the point, or understand the desire, but that does nt make it nonsense. It is simply personal preference. And I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly never said "as the author intended it". The argument of nothing ever being perceived "as the author intended it" is limited at best and specious at worst. No, you can't get *exactly* the same message or meaning from something as the creator got from it, and no two viewers are going to get the exact same thing from a film or readers from a book, but the storyline is linear, and you can experience it as it was designed to be experienced. What you get from it, and what it means to you is personal, but it is a clearer, closer experience.

Try watching "Firefly" in the order it was first broadcast on Fox sometime. I imagine it's very, very different and in a lot of ways makes less sense (in fact, I have it from someone who saw it broadcast that it made less sense and that's at least partly why it wasn't getting as high ratings as it could have). And that's not even a directly linear tale, each episode being more-or-less self-contained. Imagine it with something very much linear and serialised, like Lost. It ruins the whole storyline.

I admit that some things I can reflexively react to are a bit silly, but I still have my reasons (for instance, I was not best pleased at Nina's post saying how there was a rumour that one of the main characters died. While realistically speaking knowing that - at least at rumoured level. Knowing for definite that one of the lead characters died would in my opinion be strongly undesirable - doesn't make much difference to the film, nor shoudl it drastically affect one's experience of the film as you still don't know who, or when, or how, or even really if, it's something I would rather not know because then I am constantly expecting something to happen and thus don't get the full value of the shock when it happens. And I like the shock. If a death (for instance) is going to come out of nowhere, half of the impact of the death is how unexpected it was. And I would thus like it to come out of nowhere and be unexpected. It is my prerogative and does not make me in any way inferior to someone who can "assimilate all the variable information in a multi-dimensional, non-linear way". If you like I can mail you and tell you what the spoiler is, and you can then decide if it's something you can accept people might be bothered with knowing - even if it doesn't bother you to know it in advance - if it's something worth validly being upset about.

Incidentally, comparing listening to symphonies and going to see them live, with going to see a film in which something unexpected occurs is plain wrong. A symphony does not require not knowing what's coming, as it's not telling a story, or at least the story is not the primary quality, the primary reason for going. Also, every simgle performance of a symphony - even by the same orchestra - is different, so going to see a performance many, many times doesn't matter. It's like going to see a well-known play - every production is different, so you're going for the production as much, if not more than, the story.

To Be Continued :)

Continuation

[microgirl.livejournal.com]

And I have to ask, if the linear arrival of the elements in your mind is so important, what about preludes, cut-scenes, flashbacks, multiple points of view? There are plenty of fantastic books and films out there that tell you the ending in the first scene

Yes, and that's the way they were made, the way they were designed to be seen, that's their point. Your argument is weak, arrogant and presumptive.

...where the very point is that you don't know what's happening next

And can you not accept that for many people this is also the point of the film? If there is a linear story they prefer to see it, at least for the first time, in a linear fashion, where if something happens that is supposed to be unexpected, that it be unexpected?

I'm not saying it makes the movie worse to know what's coming - I have watched many, many movies more than once - but it is a different experience. And wanting to experience it as purely as possible the first time is perfectly valid and not a sign of some sort of mental deviancy.

While I know people who refuse even to watch trailers, considering them to be spoilers, I watch them avidly and consider them the most important bit of a trip to the cinema to be honest. This is because a trailer - while arguably giving details of the film - doesn't actually reveal anything important, anything that shouldn't be revealed. The trailers for The Sixth Sense did not tell you the truth. Hell, even the trailers for Episode III didn't show you exactly how Anakin became Vader, and everybody knew he did! Some things shouldn't be revealed until their time. The film is just as valid if they are, but very, very different.

In any other case, you reduce your experience of the event by not preparing for it.

Well now, that rather depends on what your experience of the event is, what experience you're looking for. I like to experience the shock of seeing something shocking first hand. If someone told me Kaylee and Simon got together in the film, well, I'd be slightly miffed, I'd feel "I'd've preferred not to have known so's to be surprised" but ultimately it wouldn't be all *that* much of a surprise, cos it's bound to happen eventually, so it wouldn't be that big a deal and I'd just get all excited and anticipatory at finally seeing them kiss. However, if someone told me something like, Mal is killed well, know, I'd be pretty bloody furious, because that would be something very, very unexpected, a very big surprise, and I'd rather it be a surprise. I'd rather experience that as the writer intended, which is as a shock, unbelievable. *That's* what I mean by the "pure experience of how it was meant to be seen".

And I really, really don't see what reading transcripts of Firefly and Buffy, and interviews with Whedon has got to do with any of this, since none of those things are going to give anything away.

Man, I really am tempted to text you with this spoiler, just so you know that I'm not getting riled up over knowing that Jayne gets a girlfriend or River is actually an android. Although actually I'd consider that last one a pretty big spoiler too, as it would obviously be important, and obviously not something we'd be meant to know til it was revealed.

[microgirl.livejournal.com]

Heh, should've read everyone else's responses first. They all said it soooooo much better than I did, and less snippily. Damned articulateness! :)

[brucius.livejournal.com]

Spoilers aren't always good or bad, something like - the special effects in the matrix are really cool and then trying to show me the hanging in the air/big camera spin/kicking people in the head is only going to encourage me to go see the film and I'd probably get a laugh at a persons inability to levitate.

However, had someone had told me how the sixth sense ended their would be much rage.

It'd probably be handy if their was a number rating for spoilers, similar to the rating system for murder, so a spoiler one would actualy ruin the movie for someone and a spoiler seven would be something like 'Frodo has hairy feet'

[kshandr.livejournal.com]

I don't like being spoiled. Best example I can think of is in a TV sense, where knowing what was going to happen ten episodes from now in "Lost" would spoil the anticipation of the plotline. Same effect with "Babylon 5" when I was watching that. I appreciate conspiracy and suspense and I enjoy trying to second guess the author/scriptwriter.

This does not apply to everything (some things I don't mind being spoiled for.) I have, in the past, immersed myself in information about something before seeing it. The Spider Man movies are good examples. I know the story backwards, and the villain choices are very widely publicised so it doesn't matter overly that I don't go in "cold."

However, I appreciate that being spoiler-conscious requires some sort of willpower. The spoilers are always there if you look for them. Likewise there's always a chance you'll come across one. One has to be very careful not to expose oneself to spoilers, which means that I'd be inclined to blame myself for seeing a spoiler and not froth at the source of it. Those who enjoy spoilers have as much right to their way of watching a movie as I do.

[mr-wombat.livejournal.com]

I could make arguments about how a lot of the enjoyment in going into something spoiler free is in the feeling of acomplishment when you figure out a plot twist or nuance all on your own. Most media are not meant to be a slow trickle of experience (and if you use spoilers I don't see how you'd even get that since you're getting the entire plot in a matter of minutes) their intent is to do the whole "dizzying highs, terrifying lows" thing.
I guess it boils down to which you find the more satisfying cinematic experience - watching the slow, painful disintegration of a relationship or reading something along the lines of "And then they have a row and break up".

But I'll settle for saying "Ur rong, STFU N00b" :)

I'll read spoilers for something I know I'll never bother watching (like a missing episode in a series that will technically be spoiler for me by the next episode)

[kamaitachi.livejournal.com]

So many people have said what I thought to say, but I'll offer my two cents anyway.

I care about spoilers. I want to avoid knowing what happens in the end and if something unexpected happens while we're getting there, I want it to be just that - unexpected. If the story is very plot-driven, I don't want to know about things beforehand. I want to witness things for myself, be properly shocked if the story takes a wild twist or a character unexpectedly dies. Knowing those things beforehand would ruin some of the fun for me. Like someone said, you can only get the unspoiled experience once - then you've seen it, and the things that are supposed take you offguard won't surprise you anymore.

Many people used Sixth Sense as an example, and I tend to agree with what they said. Had I known how it ended before seeing the movie for myself, now what would've been the fun about the movie then.

As I play a lot of story-based videogames, spoilers are big thing to me. Before I played Final Fantasy VII, for example, I got spoiled over a character's death. Now, I didn't like the character in question to begin with, so their death wasn't that big a deal to me, but the event lost a lot of its impact and failed to shock me when it finally happened. Imagine if it had been a character I actually liked. Someone already mentioned this as well, but knowing that something bad (like death) is going to happen to a character, you distance yourself from them on purpose, saying "why like them, when they're going to get killed anyway?", and that way lose a part of the experience. (Unless you're like me and are in the trend of falling for the people that always end up dead, like the bad guys for example. That way you sort of learn to expect the worst, but that's beside the point.)