![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Feeling a bit antsy tonight - or compulsive, that's a better word. Possibly a side effect of a)difficult work week, b)eating too much sugar (yes, I'm a binge eater...kill me now, which is why I don't buy too much), c)procrastination in dealing with crap (see difficult work week - should have gone to mediation open house, but really didn't want to lug self to city and deal with people. Should have looked at flats, but didn't feel like depressing self.
So...I've been watching tv, surfing the net, blogging, and well surfing - got compulsive about back-stage gossip on Buffy, info on Song of Ice and Fire, etc. Landed on a decent interview of Whedon (hunting for something else entirely) - in which he more or less nails on the head why I get twitchy watching certain types of tv shows.
"I was never that big a fan of reset television. Reset tv being all that we see is Murder She Wrote. We forget what's happened. She does the same thing each week. I kept imagining a woman sitting in a room overwhelmed by all these murders she'd seen. But nope, it's like she never saw one before, each week. The X-Files bothered me in much the same way, because Scully, she was in Murder She Wrote, while he (Mulder) kept growing and changing, she never really did. Each week, after she saw the monster the week before, she'd be skeptical of monsters existing. Sitcoms for the same reason never really resonated for me because it was reset television, wacky situation after wacky situation, but no on really grew or changed. And part of the reason may be that I grew up watching Masterpiece Theater and shows like Hill Street Blues and St. Elsewhere - serialized television, where people did grow and change and are quite different from when and where they started. If we aren't changing and growing, and I'm pretty pedantic about this - if we aren't doing that, than honestly why are we here?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwnIdViJS0U&feature=related (where he says it better than I just did because I have 0 auditory memory. I can't take down exactly what people said to save my life. My visual memory is quite excellent, auditory not so much.)
At any rate - amen to that bit above and pretty much everything he states in that portion of the interview. I think and write the same way. I'm bored by reset tv and can't watch it. I've tried. I admittedly have a love/hate relationship with this writer and this writer's fandom. I do not see him as God or near perfect, and there are far better writers and far better tv series out there - that I've seen. But, in many ways...his cultural experience and liberal educational background resonate for me. On some weird level - I get where he is coming from. We grew up during the same decades and had similar "cultural" experience/background/education. He's only three to four years older than I am. We studied the same films and the same literature. Were both fans of the Western and Sci-Fi genre. Both studied Terminator and The John Ford/Howard Hawkes canon. And we are culture junkies - with a love of theater, books, plays, superhero comics (mainly Marvel and X-men), film and tv, and mostly serials, bad good, indifferent. Plus unabashed Sondheim fans. But, he likes horror better than I do.
Also watched some Marsters Q&A's - Marsters cracks me up. He's such an entertaining train wreck.
Reminds me so much of many brilliant theater actors that I've known. Also very informative on what it is like acting for a television series.
( lengthy bit about acting on Buffy and what it was like from Marsters pov and my take on some of his answers )
I have an interesting friends list or readership. About 85% were fans or are currently fans of Buffy the Vampire Series. That's why I reference it so much. Of that percentage, about 8 people or 5% possibly less, love the comic books and love Joss Whedon. 40% are annoyed by Whedon and despise the comics. And the rest? Have just moved on. This poses a bit of dilemma in posting. I have to be careful...not go too snarky, not post too much about Buffy, not post too little...mostly? I just give up and post whatever I damn well please, until that is I get attacked by someone, and have no clue what to do. And attacked is relative. All a matter of perception. What I may perceive as an attack, you might not, and vice versa. I basically perceive anything that embarrasses me and sends my blood pressure up as an attack, but hey mileage varies. And I have a temper. I get frustrated and exasperated. It happened this week at work. I ended up sending an email, thought I retracted it, didn't - and had to apologize. Nothing horrible, no cursing. Just slightly crisp and sarcastic. Because I'd lost patience with the project manager. We were arguing about semantics - or the definition of a kick-off meeting vs. a meet and greet meeting. I swear nothing frustrates me more than arguments that go like this: yes it is, no it isn't, yes it is, no it isn't. Which basically is every argument I've ever had regarding semantics, metaphors, or contextual meaning. Proving that no matter how hard I work at being a good writer - someone is going to completely misread or misinterpret what I wrote. Usually, if I'm lucky, it will only be one person. Which brings up a question, assuming you've read this far - why do people respond to journals to quibble or mainly to quibble or argue? Not that they don't respond postively too, they do. But there's a lot of quibbling. I mean, what do you expect to gain by telling the person who wrote the entry that you dislike the show they just wrote a rave review on, or that you loved the actor or designer or show they ranted about for five minutes? I mean, outside of a very angry poster wanting to kick you?
I think people just like to argue and quibble personally. It's deeply ingrained in our DNA. Even the people who tell me they hate conflict, quibble.
Off to bed, have a lot to do tomorrow morning and I've stayed up too late again. [Not edited and the paragraph breaks are atrocious, here's hoping you won't hold it against me.]
So...I've been watching tv, surfing the net, blogging, and well surfing - got compulsive about back-stage gossip on Buffy, info on Song of Ice and Fire, etc. Landed on a decent interview of Whedon (hunting for something else entirely) - in which he more or less nails on the head why I get twitchy watching certain types of tv shows.
"I was never that big a fan of reset television. Reset tv being all that we see is Murder She Wrote. We forget what's happened. She does the same thing each week. I kept imagining a woman sitting in a room overwhelmed by all these murders she'd seen. But nope, it's like she never saw one before, each week. The X-Files bothered me in much the same way, because Scully, she was in Murder She Wrote, while he (Mulder) kept growing and changing, she never really did. Each week, after she saw the monster the week before, she'd be skeptical of monsters existing. Sitcoms for the same reason never really resonated for me because it was reset television, wacky situation after wacky situation, but no on really grew or changed. And part of the reason may be that I grew up watching Masterpiece Theater and shows like Hill Street Blues and St. Elsewhere - serialized television, where people did grow and change and are quite different from when and where they started. If we aren't changing and growing, and I'm pretty pedantic about this - if we aren't doing that, than honestly why are we here?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwnIdViJS0U&feature=related (where he says it better than I just did because I have 0 auditory memory. I can't take down exactly what people said to save my life. My visual memory is quite excellent, auditory not so much.)
At any rate - amen to that bit above and pretty much everything he states in that portion of the interview. I think and write the same way. I'm bored by reset tv and can't watch it. I've tried. I admittedly have a love/hate relationship with this writer and this writer's fandom. I do not see him as God or near perfect, and there are far better writers and far better tv series out there - that I've seen. But, in many ways...his cultural experience and liberal educational background resonate for me. On some weird level - I get where he is coming from. We grew up during the same decades and had similar "cultural" experience/background/education. He's only three to four years older than I am. We studied the same films and the same literature. Were both fans of the Western and Sci-Fi genre. Both studied Terminator and The John Ford/Howard Hawkes canon. And we are culture junkies - with a love of theater, books, plays, superhero comics (mainly Marvel and X-men), film and tv, and mostly serials, bad good, indifferent. Plus unabashed Sondheim fans. But, he likes horror better than I do.
Also watched some Marsters Q&A's - Marsters cracks me up. He's such an entertaining train wreck.
Reminds me so much of many brilliant theater actors that I've known. Also very informative on what it is like acting for a television series.
( lengthy bit about acting on Buffy and what it was like from Marsters pov and my take on some of his answers )
I have an interesting friends list or readership. About 85% were fans or are currently fans of Buffy the Vampire Series. That's why I reference it so much. Of that percentage, about 8 people or 5% possibly less, love the comic books and love Joss Whedon. 40% are annoyed by Whedon and despise the comics. And the rest? Have just moved on. This poses a bit of dilemma in posting. I have to be careful...not go too snarky, not post too much about Buffy, not post too little...mostly? I just give up and post whatever I damn well please, until that is I get attacked by someone, and have no clue what to do. And attacked is relative. All a matter of perception. What I may perceive as an attack, you might not, and vice versa. I basically perceive anything that embarrasses me and sends my blood pressure up as an attack, but hey mileage varies. And I have a temper. I get frustrated and exasperated. It happened this week at work. I ended up sending an email, thought I retracted it, didn't - and had to apologize. Nothing horrible, no cursing. Just slightly crisp and sarcastic. Because I'd lost patience with the project manager. We were arguing about semantics - or the definition of a kick-off meeting vs. a meet and greet meeting. I swear nothing frustrates me more than arguments that go like this: yes it is, no it isn't, yes it is, no it isn't. Which basically is every argument I've ever had regarding semantics, metaphors, or contextual meaning. Proving that no matter how hard I work at being a good writer - someone is going to completely misread or misinterpret what I wrote. Usually, if I'm lucky, it will only be one person. Which brings up a question, assuming you've read this far - why do people respond to journals to quibble or mainly to quibble or argue? Not that they don't respond postively too, they do. But there's a lot of quibbling. I mean, what do you expect to gain by telling the person who wrote the entry that you dislike the show they just wrote a rave review on, or that you loved the actor or designer or show they ranted about for five minutes? I mean, outside of a very angry poster wanting to kick you?
I think people just like to argue and quibble personally. It's deeply ingrained in our DNA. Even the people who tell me they hate conflict, quibble.
Off to bed, have a lot to do tomorrow morning and I've stayed up too late again. [Not edited and the paragraph breaks are atrocious, here's hoping you won't hold it against me.]
