![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Jan. 23rd, 2008
Another WTF moment at TWOP
Jan. 23rd, 2008 08:16 pmI only go their to torture myself.
Anyway, two people are arguing about Michael Scofield. One person's argument is the writer's aren't doing enough to explicitly tell his every emotion. Another said they're giving enough clues as to what's going on that the viewer can read it in subtext (basically). As to which is better (being given everything explicitly or subtextually so you can draw you're own conclusion) it's a matter of taste. Pretty standard, right?
Um. No. The first person, a professional writer, puts this:
it is not right to have different people reading different things.
...
So. What do we do in literature class and what those people who analyze movies and scripts do? Because, while there may be some consensus...
Also:
And no, it is not right to have different people reading different things.
I just...
This kind of goes against everything I've ever heard about reading/writing.
Anyway, two people are arguing about Michael Scofield. One person's argument is the writer's aren't doing enough to explicitly tell his every emotion. Another said they're giving enough clues as to what's going on that the viewer can read it in subtext (basically). As to which is better (being given everything explicitly or subtextually so you can draw you're own conclusion) it's a matter of taste. Pretty standard, right?
Um. No. The first person, a professional writer, puts this:
it is not right to have different people reading different things.
...
So. What do we do in literature class and what those people who analyze movies and scripts do? Because, while there may be some consensus...
Also:
And no, it is not right to have different people reading different things.
I just...
This kind of goes against everything I've ever heard about reading/writing.