I was very amused and appreciative of the discussion of "Deadwood," a TV program that I've never seen. As one of my recent posts might suggest, I'm beginning to wonder if multi-episodic TV may actually be a better format to engage complex characters, relationships and ideas than any alternative dramatic/comedic form I'm aware of. (For one, it permits writers second, third and fourth thoughts about their characters.)

I also noticed that several of the shows mentioned in the discussion pair two key elements: an emotional situation that many people are familiar with and a very dramatic, conflict-laden situation, which permits the emotional situation to be exteriorized and (violently) dramatized. For example, in the first season of "The Sopranos," the emotional situation was male mid-life crisis and the conflict-laden situation was mob life. At least in the first season of "The Sopranos," this two track schema can be so sharply defined that it automatically suggest humor (as when Tony's mother, angry at being shunted into a nursing home, schemed to get her son whacked.)

I wonder what such embedded story-telling or dramatic structures tell us about psychology.

Posted by: Friedrich von Blowhard on April 15, 2005 5:11 PM

A beaver pelt tangent:

While on trips to northern Minnesota, I've spent the night in Bemidji, a fairly typical lake resort town. In this town there is a salon called "Beaver Look". I'm guessing that they would understand the metaphor. I'm sure the only reason for the name is that Bemidji State's mascot is the beaver ... really.

Posted by: Doug Sundseth on April 15, 2005 6:20 PM

Friedrich: "...I'm beginning to wonder if multi-episodic TV may actually be a better format to engage complex characters, relationships and ideas than any alternative dramatic/comedic form I'm aware of."

It seems to me that this is also an argument in favor of series fiction in written form. At the least, it's an argument I can use the next time the "genre fiction" vs. "literary fiction" debate comes up. Thanks!

Posted by: Doug Sundseth on April 15, 2005 6:24 PM

Doug, I just exclaimed over your Chad Mitchell reference on another thread, and here you are bringing up Bemidji, where my sister and I spent a few days last summer -- without having come upon the "Beaver Looks" salon, though, I have to say.

I have a feeling that I would enjoy knowing you in RL (not to be read as one of those online come-ons, though . . .)

Posted by: missgrundy on April 16, 2005 11:44 AM

I once saw a photo online of a roadside alchohol store called "Beaver Liquors." I wonder if it was taken in Bemidji.

Posted by: Michael Blowhard on April 16, 2005 11:47 AM

Boy, a lot of hostility has crept into the blog, and it ain't fun. Just because someone disagrees with you about the quality of a simile doesn't make them "clueless." So much for tolerance.

Posted by: annette on April 18, 2005 9:38 AM

"Tolerance" as a virtue is irrelevant to technical question of similes we discuss. As a technical term (in dimensioning mechanical parts of a gun, f.ex.) it is very much part of my vocabulary.

Besides, I haven't noticed much of a "tolerance"towards my views from Demo-Liberal camp. In literature, too.

I don't recall having direct conversation with your prof (I called HIM clueless; and he is) - are you taking offense in his name or you're the prof in question?

Posted by: Tatyana on April 18, 2005 11:40 AM

From the end of Gatsby:

"“tomorrow we will run faster, stretch our arms out father… so we beat on, boats against the current, born back ceaselessly into the past.”

This is good literature? One example doesn't doom a book but the ending of Gatsby is singularly bad. I also find Fitzgerald's exploration of the theme -- I understand it to be success & emptiness in America -- hamhanded and not as memorable as it should be.

Posted by: jult52 on April 18, 2005 2:41 PM

If you want to bash an author, jt, give him a courtesy of correct citation (and spelling; borne isn't the same as born)

It's a charming ending (in my ESL opinion), a delicious fragrant prose, as much Art Deco as the bronze grilles of the Chanin building or elegantly misleading simplicity of cloches.

May I ask what do you think of this ending, from another high-school required reading bore [note the "born" usage]:

...As for her coming without that preparation, without that effort on our part, without that determination that when she is born again she shall find it possible to live and write her poetry, that we cannot expect, for that would he impossible. But I maintain that she would come if we worked for her, and that so to work, even in poverty and obscurity, is worth while.

Posted by: Tatyana on April 18, 2005 3:07 PM

If you want to bash an author, jt, give him a courtesy of correct citation (and spelling; borne isn't the same as born)

It's a charming ending (in my ESL opinion), a delicious fragrant prose, as much Art Deco as the bronze grilles of the Chanin building or elegantly misleading simplicity of cloches.

May I ask what do you think of this ending, from another high-school required reading bore [note the "born" usage]:

...As for her coming without that preparation, without that effort on our part, without that determination that when she is born again she shall find it possible to live and write her poetry, that we cannot expect, for that would he impossible. But I maintain that she would come if we worked for her, and that so to work, even in poverty and obscurity, is worth while.

Posted by: Tatyana on April 18, 2005 3:07 PM

Involuntary Clicking Syndrome (ICS) again, sorry. Please disregard double entry.

Posted by: Tatyana on April 18, 2005 4:45 PM

I do like that ending you provided, Tatyana, and find it very different from the swelling pomposity of the Gatsy ending. Where is it from?

Gatsby: I was trying to find the entire ending, which I thought was atrociously filled with bathos, but didn't succeed in finding it all online. Anyway, I regret the "born-borne" mixup but I wasn't chastising Fitzgerald for his spelling.

Posted by: jt on April 19, 2005 9:31 AM

V. Woolf, A room of one's own
Once again I'm surprised at how different people's perceptions are. I find that Woolf's writing requires certain preparation, often to the point of pronouncing her sentences in my head a few times, to get their distinctive attraction.

Completely opposite to Fitzgerald; I get him without any effort, as if reading something I could write myself - if I'd his talent, of course.

Posted by: Tatyana on April 19, 2005 11:03 AM

Oh, and here's the correct citation from Gatsby:

"...the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter - tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther. . . . And one fine morning——

So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past."

As you can see, *borne back into the past* makes much more sense than *born back*.

[taken from same wonderful
online-text library as Woolf's ending]

Posted by: Tatyana on April 19, 2005 11:14 AM






Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember your info?