Re: In defense of Continuity

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
 Johanna Draper Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  Nathan Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > I think what you're arguing against is something else entirely: bad 
> > storytelling. 
> 
> Oh, yes, that's definitely something we can agree on. 
> 
> I think too much attention to continuity as a primary consideration is 
> likely to lead to bad storytelling, which is why I'm leery of that 
> approach. 

To me, that's the same as saying "too much attention to plot is likely 
to lead to bad storytelling".

I don't think continuity should be *the* primary goal, but it should be 
in the set of goals, containing, among other things, plot, 
characterization, and pacing.

> > in soap operas (which are more drenched in self-referencing 
> > continuity than comic books could ever hope to be, and yet are in no 
> > danger of dying out).
> 
> Actually, I've read several articles this year on how soap operas are 
> desperately trying to increase their ratings as their traditional 
> audience has drifted away and new viewers haven't appeared.

But the question is, are they dying out because of their heavy 
continuity?  Unlikely, since soaps have had heavy continuity for decades.

And like comics, soaps have a presumed target audience (teens and adult 
women for soaps, pre-teens and geeky adults for comics).  As that 
audience find other things to do with their time (work, cable TV, video 
games, the internet), the audience shrinks, because people from outside 
the target audience (young children and adult men for soaps, teens and 
non-geeky adults for comics) have no interest in the product because 
they don't think it's targetted to them and don't want to be associated 
with the target audience.

Nathan

-- 
To contact me, replace verizon.net with aol.com