the narrative twist i hate most in the world wide world...

[lirazel]

What's the opposite of a bulletproof narrative kink? Whatever that is, I have settled on my ultimate one.

I hatehatehatehatehatehate when Character A does something that Character B misinterprets. But there is a totally logical and reasonable explanation for what Character A did that if Character B just knew about it, would totally be okay with. But Character A doesn't explain, and so Character B feels betrayed/angry/whatever.

Now, there are very rare occasions when Character A has some actual reason when s/he can't explain--sometimes because of a promise or honor or very, very, very rarely because Character A is so timid or whatever that s/he can't work up the courage to.

But 90% of the time, the only reason Character A doesn't just explain what happened is because the narrative wants to prolong the angst and misunderstanding. And I hate this not only because it's hella annoying but because it privileges plot over characterization, which is something I can't stand. Good plot arises from the actions of the characters, actions that are consistent with who those characters are. Plot that overwhelms characters or demands that characters act a certain way...I have no interest in those kinds of stories. The best stories have excellent plot and characters, but I'll take characterization over plot any day.

Ugh. Why do fictional characters never just talk to each other? It's so unrealistic to me. Communication is the key to good relationships, and it's far more interesting to me to have characters who actually tell the truth to each other and then have conflict because they want different things or something than it is to see them misunderstanding each other at every turn. Ugh.

This post brought to you by romantic comedy kdramas: best OTPs, worst plotting.

Comments

[anythingbutgrey.livejournal.com]

lol yes i agree makes me crazy. lazy storytelling. stop.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

So lazy. Push yourself, writers. Put in some effort!

[eilowyn.livejournal.com]

YES. And I think it's called a narrative squick? The opposite of kink being squick?

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

I AM GLAD OTHERS AGREE WITH ME.

Yeah, maybe? I don't know...with a squick to me the implication is it kind of grosses you out? Which...this doesn't gross me out, exactly, it just makes me angry. A squick
(to me, and maybe I'm using it wrong) is more like how I used to feel about mpreg and how I will always feel about adultery-being-glorified. EW GROSS DO NOT WANT. But you're probably right.

[mollivanders.livejournal.com]

I remember there being a lot of drama post POTC2 over The Kiss and silly me, I argued that Elizabeth and Will could just have a talk. BUT NO OF COURSE NOT. That would be silly.

I feel like a lot of CW shows this to the point of absurdity. Kinda explains why I stopped watching them.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

JUST TALK TO EACH OTHER. How am I supposed to take you seriously as a functional relationship if you don't do that? This sort of thing is okay when the point is that the relationship is dysfunctional, but when they're trying to present them as functional, I cannot with this business.

See also: why I hate so many romantic comedies. If the couple just took five seconds to hash things out, the plot would collapse like a souffle. MAKE MORE INTERESTING PLOTS.

[crackers4jenn.livejournal.com]

YES. I remember something happening like that on Rookie Blue, as a specific example, which is one of my latest obsessions, where Character A was in a relationship with Character B, whose bestest bro, Character C, started developing feelings for Character A. He confessed those feelings one night while on painkillers, as you do, and then kissed Character A. ON THE HAND. Soon enough Character B found out that there was a FEELINGS REVEAL and ALSO A KISS, but no one bothered to base this bro up that THE KISS WAS ON THE HAND, FOOL, LITERALLY NOTHING SEXY ABOUT THAT. And it drove me nuts because Character B afterwards was like, "CHARACTER C, YOU JERK, YOU KISSED MY GIRL!!!" and Character C did not say, "Sure, but it was on the hand, buddy. Gentlemanly! A total non-threat! Settle yourself!"

In summary: WORD TO YOUR WHOLE POST.

But, conflictingly, on the same show there will often be minor misinterpretations between my OTP that normally would drive me up the wall -- mixed signals everywhere + the occasional lack of communication that leads to angst and much pining -- only instead of actually making me go nuts with dislike, it really really works for me.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

, but no one bothered to base this bro up that THE KISS WAS ON THE HAND, FOOL, LITERALLY NOTHING SEXY ABOUT THAT. And it drove me nuts because Character B afterwards was like, "CHARACTER C, YOU JERK, YOU KISSED MY GIRL!!!" and Character C did not say, "Sure, but it was on the hand, buddy. Gentlemanly! A total non-threat! Settle yourself!"

OH GOD THAT WOULD DRIVE ME SOOOOO CRAZY. That is exactly the kind of thing I am talking about!

There are a few times when it can be done well, but 90% of the time it just comes across as lazy.

[ghostyouknow27.livejournal.com]

Hmmm, I think it depends on the nature of the miscommunication? If it's something stupid-simple like, "Oh, what? I didn't steal your grandmother's ring. I just took it to the jewelers to get the stone reset because I noticed that it was getting loose," it's lame. Because that's the kind of thing that would be fixed with a simple truth, and any complications rising from that misunderstanding could be dismissed easily.

But, while I agree that communication is healthy, it's also something that many, many people struggle with. You know, most of us don't say exactly how we feel and exactly what we mean 100% of the time. Even if we do, we can be misinterpreted. I am pro-miscommunication, not necessarily as a plot device, but as characterization and in creating character moments. You know, there can be a big disparity between actions/words/actual intent, and I think that stuff is interesting to explore. And I feel like almost everyone has *something* that they keep hidden of find hard to talk about, and that what people don't say is just as/more interesting than what they do. So, I guess I'm saying that the plot should not hinge on a simple misunderstanding, but complicated misunderstandings can create a lot of interest and emotional investment, if they stem from something real about both characters, and if clearing the misunderstanding can't/doesn't fix everything. I'm thinking a lot about Persuasion, actually. I really enjoy how society/expectations prevent the two main characters from ever just sitting down and talking to each other, to the extent that they announce they still love each other by starting a philosophical debate and hoping the other person eavesdrops.

That said, I do agree with 99% of your post. I just think that having everyone talk to each other could quickly become equally as boring, albeit in a different way.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

"Oh, what? I didn't steal your grandmother's ring. I just took it to the jewelers to get the stone reset because I noticed that it was getting loose." Because that's the kind of thing that would be fixed with a simple truth, and any complications rising from that misunderstanding could be dismissed easily.

This is the sort of thing I'm talking about, actually.

So, I guess I'm saying that the plot should not hinge on a simple misunderstanding, but complicated misunderstandings can create a lot of interest and emotional investment, if they stem from something real about both characters, and if clearing the misunderstanding can't/doesn't fix everything.

Absolutely. But I rarely see this done well, if that makes sense? Persuasion is a great example of when it is done well, because it arises from the characters' actual personalities interacting with societal expectations, as you say. That sort of thing can be lovely. But when it's very clear that they are only doing this for PLOT and for MORE ANGST and not because people would actually behave this way...it drives me crazy.

. I just think that having everyone talk to each other could quickly become equally as boring, albeit in a different way.

I might feel this way more if I saw more actual talking, but I feel like I never do on TV? Tami and Eric from FNL come to mind--they are ridiculously functional but never, ever boring, and they talk and then their conflict and drama arises from the fact that they disagree. Probably if every relationship was like that on TV, I'd be bored. But since I feel like it swings too far the other way, I crave that sort of thing.

[ghostyouknow27.livejournal.com]

That sort of thing can be lovely. But when it's very clear that they are only doing this for PLOT and for MORE ANGST and not because people would actually behave this way...it drives me crazy.
I agree with that. Stupid misunderstandings are completely overused. I think a good rule of thumb would be, "Does the whole plot *hinge* on a misunderstanding? If so, knock it off." I'd rather have some kind of complication, i.e. The Plot, create the situations that lead to misunderstandings. So, maybe the lack of communication makes things more difficult, but even if both characters sit down and hug it out, they're still going to have a lot of problems on their plate.

I might feel this way more if I saw more actual talking, but I feel like I never do on TV? Tami and Eric from FNL come to mind--they are ridiculously functional but never, ever boring, and they talk and then their conflict and drama arises from the fact that they disagree. Probably if every relationship was like that on TV, I'd be bored. But since I feel like it swings too far the other way, I crave that sort of thing.
I think Tami and Eric are awesome, and I love that relationship because there's so much talking about everything. But that was Very Well Done. I think if all the writers who like to make a dumb misunderstanding do all their plotting for them switched to just having everyone talk to each other all of the time, you'd end up with really painful on-the-nose stuff.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

Stupid misunderstandings are completely overused. I think a good rule of thumb would be, "Does the whole plot *hinge* on a misunderstanding? If so, knock it off." I'd rather have some kind of complication, i.e. The Plot, create the situations that lead to misunderstandings. So, maybe the lack of communication makes things more difficult, but even if both characters sit down and hug it out, they're still going to have a lot of problems on their plate.


Yes, I definitely agree with you. Those are about my feelings on everything.

But that was Very Well Done. I think if all the writers who like to make a dumb misunderstanding do all their plotting for them switched to just having everyone talk to each other all of the time, you'd end up with really painful on-the-nose stuff.

This is true, and on-the-nose stuff does annoy me, but personally not quite as much as stupid misunderstandings.

I guess I should just ask for better writers in general, then? :D

[zombie_boogie.livejournal.com]

Word word wordwordwordwordword. Which is why when characters are actually open and honest with each other it's so refreshing and makes me so damn happy.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

EXACTLY!

[dollsome.livejournal.com]

THIS. THIS. THIS!!!! I always find it so disorienting and unnatural, because I nearly always feel like my impulse would be to TALK TO WHOEVER ABOUT WHATEVER. Like, a lot! Straight up ramblitude would be goin' on!

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

, because I nearly always feel like my impulse would be to TALK TO WHOEVER ABOUT WHATEVER. Like, a lot! Straight up ramblitude would be goin' on!

This is so my impulse. If anything, I over explain. I guess it wouldn't bother me so much that some people don't if only we ever got portrayals of people who had our instincts to TALK TALK TALK.

[muneca-brava.livejournal.com]

I hate that too! Like when someone eavesdrops on a conversation but only a part of it that they misinterpret and then they leave, at which point the conversation turns out to be about something completely different. Worst narrative trick in the world.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

YES. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Exactly. And it's doubly frustrating, because if I'm eavesdropping, I wanna stick around for the WHOLE conversation just to make sure I don't miss something.

[shamoogity.livejournal.com]

This is one of my huge pet peeves too! And it's so overused! Argh! I'm getting angry just thinking about it.

[silverusagi]

But 90% of the time, the only reason Character A doesn't just explain what happened is because the narrative wants to prolong the angst and misunderstanding.

Are you me? This is my #1 pet peeve, too. (And one of the reasons I dislike SPN S6, because IMO characters' actions are kept from other characters just so we can have the plot, even though it makes no sense for the characters not to talk.) I hate "plot" that could be resolved if one person just opened their mouth and said two sentences.

[chickosaurusrex.livejournal.com]

I super agree! I'm definitely a fan of stories that are driven by characters and their motivations, rather than misunderstandings and coincidences.

[ever-neutral.livejournal.com]

Outraged!Lauren is freaking cute.

But seriously though, I feel your pain. The thing is, I actually DO love constant miscommunication/misunderstandings between characters. I'm not the greatest at open communication myself, so I actually do understand characters' inexplicable desire to Not Talk. I love characters who just fail at communication. I love (fictional) relationships where two people are just BAD at talking about their ~feelings, or just CAN'T, for whatever reason. I LIVE FOR THAT SORT OF CRAP. (We know what I'm like.) So long as it's well-written and character-driven. But this is rare. ;)