Exciting forays into the TV, movies, books, and web sites worth geeking out over. Will also feature other random topics of interest to the intrepid blogger.
The death of Merle Dixon echoed through the "Walking Dead" fandom like a gunshot. For a moment, there was only stillness and horror as we watched Daryl dissolve into sobbing, inconsolable grief. Then, as the younger Dixon stabbing his zombified brother's face into a messy goo and the credits rolled, the internet erupted.
Admit it. If you ran into a zombie with a knife hand, you'd poop yourself and die.
Some folks were pleased. They never liked Merle. And honestly, what was there to like? Merle was a drug-using racist asshole who was introduced to us in season 1 as the guy playing alpha male and popping shots off in the middle of zombie-filled Atlanta. When he turned up as the sadistic right hand of the Governor, no one was really surprised. Merle had "henchman" written all over him. The way he pummeled Glenn into mush and then shoved a walker in to finish him really cinched it. Merle was the devil. He recognized that everyone must see him that way, himself, in "This Sorrowful Life."
"Buck up, son. This is still better than if it came to arm-wrestling."
But Merle had always given hints that he was more than just a redneck stereotype fit only for slaughter. For one thing, whether you love him or you hate him, you can't deny that he's a complete badass. I don't think a single one of us can imagine having the stones to saw off our own hand, stumble downstairs without fainting, and cauterize the wound on a stove. And even if we could even manage such a thing, I doubt the average Joe would be able to fight his way out of Atlanta one-handed and haul ass to safety while weak from blood loss. No, I think in Merle's situation, most people would've curled up into a weepy, shivering ball of human misery and waited for death to find them.
Coming back as a hallucination in season 2, Merle was as antagonistic as ever, haranguing a fallen Daryl with a varied and colorful array of insults to his manhood and fortitude. But even as a hallucination, there was a sense that Merle considered himself to be acting for Daryl's own good. And indeed, through his stinging hail of verbal barbs, he drove his weary brother up and out of the gorge so that he could seek treatment for the injuries he sustained in his fall.
"And if you do not go, I shall taunt you a second time!"
When we finally catch up with the corporeal Merle and his shiny new knife-hand in season 3, the only thing our pal Merle can think of once he knows Daryl's still out there is finding his baby brother. And you have to wonder why. Merle's been painted as an unsentimental hardass up to this point. He's not a nice guy, he's not a caring guy, and we'd never actually seen these two interact in the flesh. It seems like a harsh question to ask about any human being, but I had to wonder, did he want his brother back because he loved him or was it a control thing? Did he miss his brother's company, or did he have to have him because he was HIS brother?
*singing* "I can't liiiiiiiive... if living is without you!"
Honestly, I didn't know until the two Dixons left the group to fend for themselves in "Home." Predictably, despite Daryl leaving the people he'd come to care for and respect to be with Merle, Merle continued to berate and deride his brother. And seeing Daryl spurred to heroics to help stranded strangers escape from walkers doesn't make Merle any kinder. He clearly regarded his brother's bravery as the worst sort of foolishness. But then their conversation takes a turn. Merle is aghast to discover that his brother had taken the beatings Merle used to suffer at their father's hands in Merle's absence. It sets him back, throws him off his macho game, and leaves him fumbling for equilibrium. You can tell he hates that this happened to his brother, and he wants to make things right somehow, but he knows that he'll never be welcome at the prison. In the end, he goes back, because Daryl makes it clear that he's going back with or without him.
"This Sorrowful Life" then gives us Merle in his death throes, thrashing like prey in the jaws of an alligator. He knows how they all see him. Even as Daryl tries to talk Glenn into forgiving Merle for that whole attempted murder business, Merle is aware that the group looks at him as the bad guy and probably always will. There's something particularly wild in his search for drugs in the prison bedding. I saw someone who can't stay still, who can't stay within his own skin without the benefit of a little medicinally-induced dullness.
He seemed to welcome the grim, murderous task of delivering Michonne. This was the best they could expected of him, that he would do their dirty work for them. And he decided, when Rick asked him to do it, to live up to their expectations. If they wanted him to be soulless garbage, then he would be soulless garbage and do the thing that none of them had the stomach for. And Merle decided there would be no going back on this. Rick wanted him to be the hooded executioner taking the taunts and jeers of the crowd for him, and he was going to carry out his orders even if they were rescinded. So he took Michonne and bore her off to be their sacrificial lamb.
She did get under his skin, digging in about how he wasn't the man he tried to pretend he was. That he wouldn't lament being a bad guy if he really was one. And truthfully, it was telling that he had never killed anyone before the apocalypse and that he kept count of those he did since then. The count suggested to me a man who felt each death leave a mark on his soul, which wouldn't be the case if he had no soul to speak of.
When Merle let Michonne go and went on his sniper mission against the Governor's men, we all knew Merle had decided then that he wasn't coming back to the prison. That he wasn't coming back anywhere, if he could help it. But the why of it had people confused. And yet, while I wholeheartedly agree that the motivation behind Merle's final mission could have been much more clearly developed, I completely understood it.
In this episode, Merle realized that his brother had a new family. Daryl had a place in the prison, with these people who cared for him and respected him. They would never feel that way about Merle. He could only linger in the shadows, pissing them off and accepting the brunt of their hateful stares as his due, and be the outsider there by Daryl's grace alone. And chances are, he was going to screw it up for Daryl. I think when he was hunting up drugs, he could feel the restlessness that drives him to sin stirring, wanting to fight and rant and raise Hell. And he may have been trying to resist it, to dull it, but he'd give in eventually and ruin everything. Then he'd put Daryl in the position of choosing between Merle, who didn't know how to treat him well, or the group of people who did.
It was a self-fulfilling prophecy. Merle had come to see himself as the others did, to believe himself incapable of better. And because all he could do was drag Daryl down with him, he did the only useful thing he could think of: he decided to take himself out of the picture and bring as many of those Woodbury bastards with him as possible.
What he couldn't do was go back and face the group after doing exactly what was expected of him. He couldn't pretend like he was capable of being a better man. He just had to fight as cleverly and as brutally as only he knew how, and hope that his brother would be better for it.
Which actually showed that he would have been capable of being a good man, if he had only been able to believe it, himself.
"You've got to play the hand you're dealt. I only got one."
I wasn't happy that Merle died in the end. I was torn apart by Daryl's reaction, and by the notions of what might have been if Merle had just had an ounce of faith in himself. And for myself, I suspect that even if this had to be Merle's end, it could have done him more justice if we'd gotten to see a few more glimpses of the man he really was beneath the bad guy, the henchman, the racist redneck and verbally abusive older brother. There was more to Merle, and we only scratched the surface. But I was happy to have the answer to my question in the end. Merle did love Daryl, and he loved him more than his own life.
It seems unhealthy to seek after feelings of crushing anguish and bittersweet misery. Normally, we don't walk into situations and hope to walk back out weeping. And yet, there are times when even the best-adjusted individual may pine after a bit of romantic angst, told so beautifully than one can't even fully regret the ending. So what does it take to tell a tale that destroys hearts, and yet keeps us coming back for more? Well, I'm going to run through three well-known favorites in the realm of tragic romance and analyze what it is about these tales that, in the words of the great Mr. Mellencamp, makes them "hurt so good."
ROMEO AND JULIET
Call it cliche, if you wish, but this story is a classic example of love gone epically wrong. From the moment the young lovers meet and get nailed with a lightning bolt between the eyes, the universe seems to be plotting against them. It's bad enough that their families are bitter rivals who will never let them be together. They manage to circumvent that little obstacle by marrying in secret with the help of a friendly neighborhood priest. But then Juliet's cousin, Tybalt, has to go picking fights and bumps off Romeo's pal, Mercutio. Which, of course, calls for a healthy dose of revenge in the form of Romeo killing Tybalt. So now the in-laws definitely aren't going to approve.
To make matters worse, Juliet's dad has promised her to another man. To avoid bigamy, the poor girl is forced to fake her own death. Unfortunately, back in the day, you couldn't send a letter certified mail with return receipt requested, so her poor hubby-in-hiding misses the message that should've let him know that the rumors of Juliet's death have been greatly exaggerated. Thinking his beloved dead, what else is our smitten young hero to do other than buy a dram of poison and pop by the visit the little woman's alleged corpse for some smooching and suicide? And, because their luck would draw dreadful odds in Vegas, Juliet wakes up just as Romeo downs the poison. As the apple of her eye expires, Juliet hurries after, plunging his dagger into her heart.
What makes this tale so compelling that we voluntarily let it punch us right in the feels? I suspect it's the elements of forbidden love and the cruelty of fate. No one can deny the lure of forbidden fruit. The idea that someone who inspires the glowing euphoria of true love would turn out to be an enemy is a powerful one. Suddenly, what should be joyous is threatening and perilous, and new love is pitted against ancient hatred. There are seemingly insurmountable obstacles to overcome, and the romantics among us long to see love conquer all.
Cue the cruel twists of fate that send it all spiraling out of control. One by one, tiny, often insignificant-seeming details go awry. From the skirmishes between Romeo, Tybalt, and Mercutio to Juliet's ill-timed engagement, suddenly these poor kids have a lot more on their plate than their parents' mutual animosity.
Then the least significant event of all happens: missed mail. We've all missed a letter here and there. A bill might get paid late. A party missed. Maybe even one learns of a sale at Bed, Bath, and Beyond just two days too late to get those new sheets at 20% off. These small tragedies are bearable. But the notion that one missed communication could result in the grief-stricken suicides of two young lovers is gut-wrenchingly unfair. This is when you know for certain that the gods (and possibly the mailman) are out to get you. And thus two star-crossed lovers become a cautionary tale for parents who let their hatred get the best of them.
Wow, I guess Pat Benatar was right. Love really is a battlefield.
Further reading: Of course, you can't beat going back to the source, so pick up your copy of Romeo and Juliet today! Also, for a similar tale of family ire turned to lovelorn tragedy, check out the tale of Pyramus and Thisbe as told in Ovid's Metamorphoses.
TRISTAN AND ISOLDE
Perhaps you're a bit cynical at the notion of love at first sight. Maybe you don't buy that Romeo and Juliet could just clap eyes on each other and know they were meant to be together for the rest of their lives. So if love at first sight isn't your cup of tea, perhaps you'd like to try a little love potion # 9?
The tale of Tristan and Isolde has few variations, but it consistently begins with our handsome hero, Tristan, being raised in the court of good King Mark, who is his uncle, mentor, and father-figure. Tristan loves and admires Mark, so when the king asks him to help him fetch a wife, Tristan is at his service. Of course, rather than hopping on medieval eharmony to find a wench who also enjoys gardening and musicals, Mark finds strands of hair that are an unusual shade of red and says, "Hell, I'll take her!" So Tristan is sent into the world to track down a ginger suffering from what is hopefully only minor hair loss.
It turns out said ginger is a radiant young princess named Isolde whose homeland is being terrorized by a dragon. To earn her hand, one must kick some rampaging reptilian ass. Undaunted by the challenge, Tristan switches gears from errand boy to knight errant and bests the beast, thereby earning the right to haul Isolde off to marry Mark.
Unfortunately, something funny happens on the way back to Cornwall. Isolde has been given a love potion she was meant to take before her wedding to King Mark. It seems like a reasonable measure to ensure her happiness with the older king who is, at this point, a stranger to her. However, by treachery or mishap, she and Tristan end up drinking the enchanted brew and falling deeply in love with each other. And now life has become truly complicated. Because Isolde is promised to Mark, and Mark is dear to Tristan. So Tristan delivers Isolde responsibly to his uncle, but despite their best intentions, the two end up carrying on behind Mark's back.
After much suspicion, the two are discovered, and this leads to disaster, betrayal, and the forced separation of the lovers. Tristan goes from being his uncle's favorite and the heir to his kingdom to an exile who must leave his true love behind. He does go on to marry another Isolde- this one called "Isolde of the White Hands"- but he's never really all that into her. And when he is mortally wounded, the original Isolde is the only Isolde with the healing skills to save him. Unfortunately, the new Isolde gets a little jealous about the way her hubby swoons over the memory of his ex. As he clings to life on the strength of his hope that his beloved will come, Isolde 2 is instructed to watch from the window for the ship's approach. If the ship flies black sails, Isolde 1 refused to help him. If the sails are white, his lady love is on the way to rescue him.
Seeing the white sails headed her way, Isolde 2 can't resist muttering that they're black. Tristan then dies of a broken heart and Isolde 1 similarly perishes from her grief when she finds him dead. Thus while their lives were longer than Romeo and Juliet's, they still ended in tragic misfortune thanks to a little white lie.
This story has some of the same allure that permeates Romeo and Juliet. There's some mistaken identity issues early on and, of course, the notion of forbidden love to make our hearts go pitter-pat. And here, too, Fate seems bent on wiping the floor with the troubled twosome, who would've been happy in-laws but for swilling the wrong bottle of wine.
But what really sets this tale apart is the betrayal. King Mark is dear to Tristan, and Tristan would not have hurt him for anything in the world. Or so it was before love got ahold of him. Then, suddenly, he can't stop himself from spitting in the eye of the one person he loves best, all for the sake of a girl he's only just met. His love is poisoned by the knowledge that it causes Mark pain, and thus each stolen moment of joy is also laced with sorrow. And Isolde wanted Tristan before she ever met Mark. Still, she respected her husband, and she wasn't happy to see her beau suffer. The result is enough angst to make the bleakest alt rock album seem downright cheery by comparison.
In the end, while one may normally frown upon adultery, you can't help but feel sorry for these two. Love makes people do crazy things, and in this case, they're at least partly absolved of responsibility through act of magic potion. And that small magic allows us to sympathize with people engaged in illicit actions, finding a way to rationalize two people giving in to their passion at the expense of those they hold dear. This glorious misery contrasts and amplifies the flashes of bravery, romance, and nobility in a way that makes them seem even more precious, and all the more frail.
Who among us hasn't had one too many magic potions and done something we regretted?
Further reading: I have yet to track down a really stellar retelling of this tale, but I have found at least one great resource for those interested in reading a comparison of the original source material.
KING ARTHUR AND GUINEVERE
It is said that the Arthurian love triangle may have been inspired or influenced by the tale of Tristan and Isolde. Certainly, the architecture is similar, it's only the scale that is so much grander. In this tale, you have your noble, respected king, only he is no mere King Mark. No, this is King Arthur, wielder of Caliburn, ruler of Camelot, and one of the greatest legendary kings ever to sport a crown. Here is the fellow who the mysterious sorcerer, Merlin, enchanted for, who united the warring tribes of Britain against the Saxons and forged a time of peace and plenty for his people. His greatness was foretold before he was born.
And what would a bold figure of a king be without a queen who outshines every other noble beauty in the kingdom? His queen, Guinevere, was described as being a rare flower of a woman. And although theirs was a political marriage, prearranged for reasons other than devotion much like Mark and Isolde's, by most accounts, there was admiration and respect between them, if not love.
Enter Sir Lancelot, the bravest of Arthur's knights, and a friend, besides. The legends touted Lancelot as a formidable warrior, the medieval equivalent of the captain of the football team and the unquestionable MVP of any battle. And besides being a badass on the field, he was apparently quite easy on the eyes as well, ensnaring hearts wherever he went. (Just ask the Lady of Shalott!) And though he destroyed many of Arthur's enemies, Lancelot turned out to be the most insidious enemy of them all when he became smitten with the queen.
It began much as Tristan and Isolde's ill-fated romance: with an act of heroism by the romantic upstart on behalf of the absent rightful husband. When Guinevere is kidnapped by another king and held prisoner, it's Lancelot who comes to save her. And because he's Lancelot and rescuing fair maidens is what he does best, he is successful. One can almost see how a woman might get swept away by a knight in shining armor who spirits her out of danger while her husband is busy elsewhere.
And so begins a passionate love affair between the knight and the queen. Torn by their loyalty to Arthur, and yet hopelessly smitten, they cannot resist a few stolen moments of bliss. Unfortunately, they're not as stealthy about it as they might have hoped. Their dalliances do not escape the notice of Arthur's knights, and it undermines his hold on the kingdom and gives his lurking enemies the opening they've been waiting for. It all comes to a head when Arthur finally discovers the affair and orders Guinevere burned at the stake. Though Lancelot rescues her, the fallout causes warfare between Arthur and Lancelot that allows Arthur's bastard son, Mordred, to try for the throne while he's distracted. And though Mordred is slain in the end, so, too, is Arthur. Thus passion topples the mighty kingdom and the dream that was Camelot dies with her king.
Here, too, we have the usual elements of a compelling tragic romance: forbidden love and cruel fate. Arthur's doom has been written in the stars for as long as his glory has and the legend resonates with the theme that nothing so good and glorious as Camelot can last in the face of human frailty. That the source of Arthur's undoing begins with the actions of his wife and his trusted friend are just the sad twist on the inevitable end of this golden age. And so this tale of woe picks up on Tristan and Isolde's theme of the betrayal of a friend and liege in the name of love, giving our tormented lovers the guilty choice between their own desires and their loyalties. The message of the chaos caused by love is amplified in this tale by the scale of the consequences. It's not just the lovers who pay the price. Because of Lancelot and Guinevere's weakness for each other, and to some extent Arthur's weakness in how he addresses it, one error begets another until a whole kingdom is ripped apart.
Lancelot: "So was it good for you?"
Guinevere: "Well, it was good, but wrecking Camelot good? Probably not."
Further reading: There's a whole host of fantastic books that are true to the popular versions of the Arthurian legends. However, I've always been a sucker for a good twist. For instance, the series by Mary Stewart that begins with The Crystal Cave is a masterful retelling of the legends, but as seen through the eyes of Merlin. It starts with his childhood and upbringing on through to the fall of Camelot, placing the mysterious enchanter in a human context that makes him relatable. It also has a very historical setting that makes the story more believable and tangible without detracting from its grandeur. Similarly, Merlin's Harp chooses to recount the legend of King Arthur from the point-of-view of the Lady of the Lake's wild Fey daughter, a mage in her own right who manages to innocently meander into the legend while trying to mind her own business. It's beautifully told, and manages to be true to the spirit of the tales without being slavish. I could go on, but, um, I probably shouldn't. ;)
CONCLUSION
In the end, it's the dire consequences that makes these tragic romances so enduring. We can all get engrossed in the passion and the yearning and the poetry, but there's also something about the notion of the unspeakable grief that can be caused by such love that resonates with a reader. In Romeo and Juliet, it's enough to claim several lives on the way to the final curtain. In Tristan and Isolde, death and shattered trusts are left in the couple's wake. And in the Arthurian legends, love brings out the flaws in great men and manages to crush Camelot in a way no Saxon army could. It speaks to our own awareness of our own frailty, our wariness of being hurt. These tales express our hope that love will conquer all, and the fear that it often doesn't. And in stirring our hearts and smashing them to ruin, these tragic lovers find a unique immortality. We may not remember all the blissful happy endings, but these searingly sad ones have a way of etching themselves into our memories. Some loves and lives manage to burn all the brighter because they burn so briefly.
1. What are your thoughts about tragic romances? Do you glory in the sweet misery of a sad ending or do you feel cheated, as a reader, when there's no happily ever after?
2. As a writer, do you ever worry that choosing the bleaker ending will alienate readers or are you fairly confident that there will always be those of us who are gluttons for emotional punishment?
3. As a reader, do you find the concept of love at first sight romantic or just illogical? Do you swoon or chalk it up to hormones?
4. As a writer, do you prefer to nurture along a slow blossoming of affection rather than go with the love lightning bolt? If so, how do you keep the pace up and keep the reader's interest?
If you're interested in exploring these topics further, feel free to join @sabrinaslibrary and me (@amandakespohl) on Twitter at the #Plottymouths hashtag on March 16, 2013 at 7:30 E.S.T.! We'll be chatting about crafting compelling romantic plots and subplots.
Whether you're penning a tale where the romance is the raison d'etre or just a subplot lurking in the background, come one, come all, and join @sabrinaslibrary and I (@amandakespohl) as we chat about the pitfalls and perils of writing a romantic plot. We'll be chatting on Twitter on March 16th at 7:30 p.m. EST under the #Plottymouths hashtag. Be there or be... well, elsewhere, but still, you'll be missing out!
Back in the day, the chick who could wail on the lute always got the flyest man-candy.
If there a certain nerd girl or guy you wish you were cozied up with this Valentine's Day? Or perhaps you've already landed the geek of your dreams, but you don't know how to express your feelings properly? Well, here are a few tools to make your nerdy love's glasses fog up.
Lord of the Rings Pick-up Lines- Not sure what it takes to get your One Ring on your sweetie's finger? Start with these Lord of the Rings-inspired pick-up lines!
Geek Candy- Though this article was intended to provide Halloween candy suggestions, I suspect any geek would be your sweetie for a chocolate Vader pop! However, if these aren't the treats you were looking for, perhaps you'd prefer a light-up candy light saber, a Legend of Zelda tin of mints, or a Limited Edition Star Trek Pez set from ThinkGeek?
And Now For Some Randomness:
Today, I was sending out Tweets to the sweet, showering my Twitter followers with nerdy sentiments. I've included my favorites here.
The Empire is watching. Get some Valentines love today or be Force-choked.
I've always heard fantastic things about Jane Yolen's writing. She's just one of those authors you come to feel backwards for not having read if you're an avid reader of children's books and young adult novels. So recently, I decided it was time to acquaint myself with the talented Ms. Yolen and her oft-praised works. While I'd been given particularly strong recommendations for The Devil's Arithmetic, I decided to start with Snow in Summer for the simple reason that I really dig clever retellings of fairy tales.
The premise alone knocked my socks off. Snow in Summer is a Snow White story set in post-Depression era West Virginia. Our Snow White is a sweet backwoods girl from a tiny town and our evil stepmother is a sinister yet elegant sorceress who also happens to be a snake handler. The bones of the fairy tale are still there: young girl loses her mother, her grief-stricken father is hoodwinked into marrying the evil stepmother, and the stepmother proceeds to circle our heroine in a predatory fashion. But layered over this classic framework is a tangible, relatable setting and more modern characters without any loss of the magical essence that the tale requires. This skillful combination of elements make the premise feel authentic and not just like a gimmick.
The quality of Ms. Yolen's writing also did not disappoint. There was a sad dreaminess to the novel that drew me in and kept me up past my bedtime. "Just one more page," I would mutter to myself under my breath. And it was never just one more page. Her descriptions had an ease and a grace that made her world seem vividly real to me.
The heroine, Summer, was likewise engaging. Her voice was filled with sensitivity and compassion as she narrated the circumstances of her mother's death in childbirth and her father's slide into distant grief. Yet despite her tenderness of spirit, Summer also had that spark of practicality and fight that makes for a well-rounded female character. She didn't just pine artfully, she employed spunk, cleverness, and strength to navigate the perils in her life. It also didn't hurt that she was a bookworm with her head in the clouds, which yours truly could relate to something fierce.
However, while the premise was inventive and imaginative, the writing was lovely, and the heroine's voice was strong, the pace left something to be desired. The book languished in backstory and spent half its pages just setting the stage. Admittedly, it was backstory beautifully told. The story of Summer's father, with his magical green thumbs and his music, and Summer's lovely mother, who so loved wildflowers that she named her daughter for them, was so rich and captivating it deserved its own novel.
The problem is that so much time was spent on Summer's tragic past and on building up the ominous nature of her stepmother's presence that the rest of the story was glossed over in a rush. In a sudden tumble of events, the huntsman was introduced, then the dwarves, and then Summer's ill-fated brush with her stepmother and the resolution. So long had we strolled languidly through the story that the sudden lurch left me blinking and trying to figure out what just happened.
The heartbreak in this is that some marvelous potential was left unexplored. The huntsman was an intriguingly churlish character, and I was curious about his motives, his relationship to the stepmother, and his feelings about Summer. But he was there and gone again so quickly in the story, I scarcely got the chance to notice him. The dwarves were also hilarious and clever characters, tiny German miners who speak so fondly of their departed mama. Again, though, they were given scant development before the denouement brought all further depiction of lovable dwarves to an end. And the twist about our Prince Charming's identity was also quite clever. But we never really get properly introduced to him, nor do we get to see the romance blossom. And though I applaud Yolen for making the story more about the heroine's struggle and less about her waiting to be rescued, the romance is still a huge part of what makes the fairy tale worth reading. Being deprived of that sigh-inducing moment of love at first sight makes a Snow White story seem less complete somehow.
In the end, I still found the book magical, beautifully written, and quite clever, but the disappointment of the missed opportunities continues to haunt me. I would still highly recommend it to those who have my passion for fairy tales, just with the caveat that this is an adventure you go on for the beauty of the journey, not the thrill of the ending. If you can accept that, you will still find yourself well-pleased by Snow in Summer.
It should come as no surprise to anyone that I'm a stickler for the rules. The rules of the road, the rules of polite behavior, the rules of good social media etiquette, the rules of Scrabble (stop playing foreign words, damn it!)... I don't see them as just arbitrary limits on one's freedom, but usually as a logical means of creating order or preventing an evil. When they exist, they usually exist for a reason. And no matter what kind of rules we're talking about, before you can break them, you should at least understand why they're there in the first place.
Now, as any avid reader of fantasy knows, there are rules to fantasy literature, as well. They may not be carved in stone and there are plenty of rule violators out there who do quite well. But generally, the people who break the rules of the fantasy genre fall into two categories: (1) total newbs who had no idea there were rules in the first place and (2) genius-types who can expertly turn such rules upside down, usually for a specific purpose or with such cleverness that nobody minds.
When two fantasy-themed TV shows, "Once Upon a Time" and "Grimm", came traipsing into my life, rules were the last things on my mind. My nerdy heart was all a-flutter at the notion of the genre I so love filling my TV screen as artfully as it filled the pages of my favorite books. "At last," I thought, "television shows that cater to my interests. Let the magic-wielding mayhem begin!"
Then cue my dawning disappointment. Apparently, the writers of these shows didn't get the memo about the fantasy genre having rules. Episode after episode, I waited to see that there was something up their sleeves I wasn't expecting, some trick that would make me see they were the genius-types and not just clueless newbs who wanted to play recklessly in the fantasy playground. Unfortunately, two seasons into both shows, it's not looking good.
So as a learning experience and to explain how I went so quickly from devotee to disenchanted, I am going to go through exactly what some of the rules are, how the shows have broken them, and why the violations are problematic.
RULE 1: MAGICAL VILLAINS NEED LIMITS
"Don't mind me and my lightning hands and my monster steed. I'm a pushover underneath all this majestic awesomeness." Original image found here.
The Rule: Whenever you're putting a mystical black hat into play, setting out his or her weakness is almost as important as picking out a properly villainous name. (Nobody cowers from the Vile Wizard Herbert.) True, it can be a psychological one- arrogance can cause a villain to underestimate his opponent, or perhaps he's got issues that make him get sloppy when the hero's taunts strike a nerve- but generally, when it comes to magic-users, magic should also come with a cost. It can be physical pain, a fatigue that sets in, a narrow range of abilities, or the limitation that a spell dissipates from the mind after use and has to be relearned. It could also be that their power is bound to a physical object that can be taken or destroyed. In the end, it doesn't matter what it is, it just has to be there.
The Reason:Imagine you're reading a fantasy novel you just picked up at the bookstore and you're really digging it. The quality of the writing is stellar and you totally relate to the main character. Then the villain walks in in chapter two. It turns out he's an all-powerful demigod with every magical gift under the sun who can keep flinging bad voodoo 'til the cows come home.
Maybe now you're wondering how this guy can EVER lose. Also, maybe you're thinking even if He Of The Limitless Power can be taken down, it's not gonna be by some plucky chump with a sword like the main character. So while you want the hero to save the day, if he/she does win, it's gonna seem pretty darned improbable.
One might keep reading after that, waiting for the villain's Achilles' heel to be revealed. But if you're only getting mounting awe at the villain's magical prowess with no sign of any advantage to the hero in sight after a certain number of pages, the book in your hands is eventually going to start looking like a 500-page waste of time. And in TV terms, magnify that loss of time by multiple episodes across several seasons. Now let's all hit the "do not record" button on our DVRs together.
The Rule-Breaker: "Once Upon a Time" is the primary offender.
How it's a problem: In the fantasy world of "Once Upon a Time", Regina is the evil queen from Snow White. They make it readily apparent from the start that she is so much more than a vain royal who clocks in too much mirror time; she's also a sorceress of boundless talent. She disappeared into thin air when Prince Charming threw his sword at her at his wedding. She cast the curse that banished the fairy tale characters to the magickless limbo they now inhabit in our world. She attacked the guards in Wonderland with plant life and she poisoned Snow White's apple with a sleeping spell. She ripped out the Huntsman's heart and eventually squished it into gooey bits. And she also seems to know everything that's going on in her world with the possible exception of where that pesky stepdaughter of hers has gotten to. With her limitless range of abilities and no sign of any spellcaster's fatigue, one has to wonder how even decent fighters like Charming and Snow could ever get the better of her.
It was more acceptable in season one, which was dominated by the magickless setting of Storybrook, Maine. There, Regina was limited to whatever small magicks she'd brought with her and her own guile. Then season two brought the magic into our world, and suddenly the only limit on Regina's ability to kick good guy ass is that her magic is a little more unpredictable and she doesn't want to upset her adopted son. And as we all regard her newfound self-control dubiously and remember that this is the same woman who had her husband assassinated, sent a man to cut out her stepdaughter's heart, and stabbed her own father, Regina's mother, Cora, has come into play in the fantasy world. And Cora is even worse than Regina when it comes to appearing to have no discernible limit to her magical prowess.
Too long, the show has progressed without it being readily apparent how anyone can get the drop on these two. At this point, I worry that no matter how much I admire Emma, Snow, Charming, and the gang, there is no way in Hell that they should be able to defeat these bad mojo-wielding mamas. If there were going to be limits or rules governing Regina and Cora's magic, they should've long since manifested. At this point, even if they're mentioned, they're going to seem like an afterthought. And that's just sloppy world-building.
On a related note...
RULE 2: THE HERO SHOULD BE UP TO THE TASK
Hey, this guy may not be in shape like Superman, but he can sure kick the Sunday crossword puzzle's ass! Original image found here.
The Rule:Whenever you've got a bad guy engaged in a reign of terror and you meet the guy who's gonna make it all come to an end, you usually need some indication of why this guy will succeed where everyone else has failed. Is he a good fighter? Does he have some mystical destiny? Does he have good information about the villain's aforementioned weaknesses? What makes the hero so damn special, after all?
The Reason: Mostly, it just seems like less of an admirable feat for our main character to defeat his nemesis if it seems like dumb luck or that anybody with a pulse could've managed it. And you have to wonder, if it's that easy, why didn't someone else step up? So you need to know exactly what the hero has going for him that makes him uniquely suited to his quest.
The Rule-Breaker: I'm looking at you, "Grimm."
How it's a Problem: I've said it before and I'll say it again: I do not understand why all the supernatural creatures on "Grimm" are terrified of Nick. He can see them, sure. He also has what amounts to a supernatural burn book ("Ooo, those hexenbiests are vicious bitches!") and an arsenal of ye olde weaponry. So he definitely has the right tools. But still, he's fighting things that look like were-animals, complete with slashing teeth and claws and some of whom have magic and/or poison, in addition to enhanced senses and supernatural strength. And yet our good-looking but otherwise seemingly normal cop seems to take them down with relative ease.
HOW?! What is the big stinking deal about being a Grimm? If there's something else to it, I really should've found out before the second season began. Otherwise, it's like reading a Spiderman comic and not finding out that he actually has superpowers until issue 10. How many people would've stuck around that long thinking our hero was just a quippy dude in spandex?
Without knowing why Nick is uniquely suited to his mission, I don't quite believe that he is. And every single episode, as I watch him take down yet another monster, I wonder why just about anyone with his aunt's book, a crossbow, and a set of magical beer goggles couldn't accomplish the same thing.
RULE 3: MAGIC SHOULD HAVE LOGIC
"Hey, Rocky, watch me pull a madman out of this hat!" Original image found here.
The Rule: While magic has an inherently surreal quality that allows it to defy all the laws of physics and reason, it should not be utterly devoid of logic. There should always be a structure governing any magical system. We should be able to tell, to some extent, where the magic comes from and how it works. Do your spellcasters have to mumble arcane words memorized from books? Do they operate using potions or enchanted objects? Do they possess an innate gift for magic, or can anyone who has the right book and ingredients start conjuring away? How does it all work? And once you explain the mechanics, you have to stick to them. If we're talking about spellbooks and crystal balls, I'm going to call shenanigans if suddenly someone just points a finger and starts spouting lightning bolts. This same rule applies to magical artifacts and beings. Everything has rules to follow.
The Reason: In some ways, this loops back around to rule # 1. We need to know how it works to know what to expect from the magically gifted and the objects we encounter. It helps guide our understanding of the plot and set up the battles knowing what each party is capable of. How things work out, or don't work out, then makes sense within this magical system. Otherwise, your story will seem like the fantasy equivalent of a Michael Bay film- all random explosions, gunfire, and ass-kicking without a point.
The Offender:If you noticed my thinly veiled rage about Jefferson's hat in my earlier post, you know this is about "Once Upon a Time."
How it's a Problem: From day one, I could not completely understand how Regina's magic operated. Some things she accomplished just because she wanted to, like her disappearing or manipulating shrubberies. Some things, like the curses she cast, seemed to require book learnin' and perhaps a trip to the apothecary's. So I'm not entirely sure how magic works in the fairy tale world.
I thought I understood how magic worked in Storybrook in season one. Because, well, it didn't. That's what everyone kept saying, right? Then Regina smooshes the heart of the local sheriff- and countless fangirl hearts with it- and I am all kinds of puzzled. OK, obviously, she's still got some tricks then, yes?
Enter the enchanted objects, such as Jefferson's hat. Jefferson, a.k.a. the Mad Hatter, can't seem to make his lovely little felt wormhole work properly because there's just no magic in our world. Cue his plan to kidnap Emma, the sole individual from the fairy tale world who has any resistance to the curse. He is convinced that Emma can make the hat work again. Emma is a little more skeptical, but she gets to craftin', 'cause, you know, he has weapons and a hostage. Then Jefferson gets shoved out of a window and appears to have disappeared into the hat...
...only to pop up a few episodes later telling Regina that he can't make the hat work on account of the lack of power in this world. But... but... How is he not all broken up and concussed, then? And how did he manage to disappear after Mary Margaret's act of defenestration?
Then Regina tells him that she really can't do anything without magical artifacts from the fairy tale world, and she's clean out. So how did the heart thing work, then? Was the heart, itself, an enchanted object when it came into this world? Inquiring minds want to know.
Inquiring minds are also growing tired of waiting for things to make sense. After a time, one wonders if things like Jefferson's semi-functional portal hat were just goofs by the writers, who suddenly decided that they needed the hat not to work to enable a future plot point. And one finds oneself unimpressed by such oversights.
RULE 4: WORLDS SHOULD HAVE DEFINITION
That awkward moment when two worlds collide outside of an officially sanctioned game of bumper worlds. Original image found here.
The Rule: This one is an odd one, because most of the time it doesn't necessarily come up. But if we're talking about a fantasy world that bleeds into other worlds, unless the plot revolves around in jumping from one strange universe to another, it's always good to give the reader a frame of reference. Are we looking at multiple worlds, or two parallel worlds? How easily can one move between them, and what are their limits?
The Reason: Working these details out will sometimes alert you to inconsistencies or plots that reek of random nonsense. Plus, our setting needs to be tied in with what the plot is trying to accomplish and the theme of the work. And if you keep darting to random worlds that seem unrelated and unnecessary, my fantasy jet lag might make me decide to deplane and take a cab back to the real world. FOREVER.
The Offender: Yes, this about "Once Upon a Time" again. Apparently, if this show were to ask the magic mirror who the most rule-breakingest show of all was, the answer would be its own reflection.
How it's a Problem: "Once Upon a Time" likes to push its limits, and typically, I like that in a show. Because of this, I've let some odd things slide. For instance, despite the show's concept being built on the notion of Grimms' fairy tales, I was okay when we tugged in folks from Wonderland and Neverland. Neither are Grimm creations and both are actually meant to be their own discrete locales, but the essence of the stories about these worlds was similar enough that I was willing to allow it.
Then somehow Frankenstein got involved. And... I died inside.
My feelings about this development can best be summed up by a scene in "Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy", when the characters are discussing past loves. Trying to be included in the conversation, Brick starts saying he loves the carpet and the desk and the lamp, forcing Ron to inquire, "Brick, are you just looking at things in the office and saying that you love them?"
At this point, I feel like Ron Burgundy, with "Once Upon a Time" as Brick. Stroking my impressive mustache, I inquire, "Once Upon a Time, are you just saying random things now? Do you really think Dr. Frankenstein makes sense in this plot or did you just throw it in because you tripped over a copy cleaning out your attic last weekend?" And then I retire in a huff to languish among my many leather-bound books.
There is no rhyme or reason to the inclusion of Dr. Frankenstein as a character in this show. He is not a fairy tale character, there is no real fairy tale theme to his story, and Dr. Frankenstein's world isn't even a discrete world such that it gels with the notion of world-jumping via Jefferson's hat. What's more, we're now genre-jumping, as well, because Frankenstein is generally regarded as a horror story. So not only am I not sure what worlds I'm dealing with here anymore, the inspiration being invoked is creating unsightly thematic inconsistencies even more frightening than Dr. Frankenstein's monster. It's enough to make a gal want to take up a torch and pitchfork in protest.
CONCLUSION
So there you have it; the problems that have bumped these shows from must-see TV to "I guess if I have a lot of time to kill, maybe someday I'll catch up" all boils down to the rules. In TV as in literature, you have to master the game before you can change the rules, and I am not convinced the creative minds behind either show have enough mastery to get away with their shenanigans.
At this point, it's "so long and thanks for all the fish!" from me as I depart with lessons learned, but then, that's just me. There are probably others who disagree. Maybe you're the type who firmly believes the rules are made to be broken. Or perhaps you think there's a method to the madness that I have somehow overlooked. If so, hit me up in the comments! I may be all about well-defined worlds, but I am wide open to conflicting opinions!
Perhaps it's the thrill. Perhaps it's the acclaim. Or perhaps it's that nothing good will be on TV until 10:00 p.m. tonight. (Come hither, "American Horror Story," for I yearn for thy perverse oddity). In any regard, I find myself, once again, participating in a blog hop. This one is called the Liebster Award and, having been tagged by Elise Valente, I am now compelled to do the following:
Step the first: I must list 11 random facts about myself. Step the second: I must answer the 11 questions posted by the person who tagged me. Step the third: I must nominate 11 others to participate in the blogginess and post 11 questions for them to answer. And so the cycle continues... Mwoohahahahahahahahaha... *lightning flashes*
There is nothing so precious as an evil child's laughter...
Now that you know what you're in for, step into my fact-filled parlor...
11 FACTS ABOUT ME:
1. Much like Odin of Norse mythology fame (and soon to be of HBO series fame), I am known by many names. However, unlike the All Father, the most prevalent of my nicknames is "Lizardsquisher," which stems from a tragic childhood event involving my bare foot, a lizard making a mad dash across my kitchen floor, and a wee green head shooting across the tiles. Having played with the lizards on my porch for so long and having written my first poem about one of them ("Ode to a Lizard on a Cup"), I found the whole thing quite traumatic.
I fear the day when the lizards have their revenge. I only hope that
2. The first book I ever read was The Tortoise and the Hare.
3. However, the first book I ever fell madly in love with was The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis. I devoured the Chronicles of Narnia when I was 7 or 8 and immediately started writing my own fantasy stories. I even wrote my first book report about The Silver Chair!
4. I compulsively collect the stickers from the tops of my gum containers. It sounds weird, but I started chewing gum when I quit smoking in 2011, so each sticker is sort of symbolic of a day I didn't smoke. I've stuck them to the outside of a plastic container for the time being with a notion of turning them into a mosaic at some point.
5. I used to have competitions with myself ever summer break from school to see if I could read more books than I did the previous summer. I always won. I don't recall the last record I set, but it was over 50.
Clearly, nerdgirls are forged in the fires of Mordor and the forests of Narnia,
6. I arrange my markers in ROY G BIV order and I am devastated when someone screws them up.
7. I didn't get my driver's license until I was 25. I just couldn't be bothered. Also, I knew I was flighty and was somewhat afraid I would kill someone. (Contrary to popular opinion, this concern has proven to be ill-founded.)
8. I delight in organization but deplore maintenance. Hence my apartment, while perfectly sanitary, is in a perpetual state of near chaos.
9. I have a huge crush on the talented actor/ handsome goofball, Norman Reedus. I usually try to hide my feelings and I realize this will come as a complete shock to everyone, but I felt like it was time to admit it.
All (with working eyeballs) shall love him and despair.
10. I have sent Norman Reedus fan art on two separate occasions, as well as the only fan letter I have ever written. It was actually a two and a half page letter about how I don't write fan letters, written in a scrupulously edited anecdotal essay format. After I sent it to him in the mail with some other trinkets, the talented Mr. Reedus sent me a direct message on Twitter expressing his appreciation, seeming specifically amused by the letter...
11. One of my all-time favorite songs in the world is "Mandolin Rain" by Bruce Hornsby. Every time I hear it, I get all misty-eyed and full of sighs.
11 QUESTIONS FROM ELISE
1. Should there be a law that forces gorgeous guys to remain shirtless as often as humanly possible, even in the face of inclement weather?
3. If you could meet any fictional character, who would it be and why?
That's a tough one. I think maybe Howl from Howl's Moving Castle, because he's pretty, adorably shallow, charming, and magical. I suspect that shenanigans would ensue.
4. What makes you think you're so special? I mean, you are special, but please elaborate on your specialness.
Um, 'cause my mom says so. Word to my mother.
5. What is your biggest pet peeve about the writing process?
Synopses are the tools of Satan, meant to oppress those who have spent years coming up with 200 pages of gold and must now reduce their genius down to a trite, digestible blurb.
Not that I have strong feelings on the matter or anything...
6. If I yell at my dog because she's currently throwing a temper tantrum over her bone, does that make me a bad person?
No, but if she yells back, it makes you a crazy one. :P
7. Did you hate the new Star Trek movie? (Hint: the correct answer is "yes.")
I wouldn't know. I went to see it in the theater after several vodka and cranberries. All I remember is something about a really big, shiny screen and someone saying "ssshhhh" a lot.
8. What is your preferred genre to write? Do you ever see yourself writing in a different genre? (I know that's technically two questions, but since one is a follow-up, it doesn't count).
Fantasy has always been my one true love. I like the element of escape with the underlying notion of using these magical elements as metaphors for real-world problems and comments on the human experience. However, I have written psychological horror and straight fiction before and enjoyed it.
9. Without using Google or any other search engine, do you have any idea where the phrase "Klaatu barada nikto" comes from? (+20 geek points if you do)
Is that Klingon for "What's your sign?"
10. You love vampires. Yes, this is a statement, not a question.
Unless they sparkle. Then I'm calling in Abraham Lincoln.
11. Tell us all about your current project and why we should encourage others to start riots over buying it when it's released.
Well, if you follow me on Twitter, you've probably seen me tweeting about Ash, my current work-in-progress. Still, the one I'm really excited about is my finished novel, The Humble Abode. This story combines the elements of the things I love most in life- sarcasm, the supernatural, magic, and short people with attitudes- into a work that is both original and humorous. Plus, there's a free fire-breathing frog included with purchase!
MY 11 QUESTIONS FOR YOU
OK, I never know who to ask to do these things, so I'm gonna ask you guys to be all Katniss Everdeen about this and volunteer. Don't worry, you don't have to fight children to the death and make out with a baker boy who is clearly less foxy than your childhood B.F.F., you just have to step up and answer my questions on your blog. Sound fair? All right, let's continue...
1. What is the best book you've ever read and why?
2. Do you have any hidden talents I might not know about?
3. How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? (Hint: The answer is, "less than Chuck Norris.")
4. If you had a theme song that played whenever you came into the room, what would it be?
5. Does cheese, in fact, make everything better?
6. What was your favorite cartoon as a kid?
7. What is the coolest thing you ever dressed up as for Halloween?
8. If you could be any mythological creature, what would you be?
9. If you found yourself in mortal peril, which super hero would you want to rescue you?
10. A spaceship crashes in your backyard and a relatively harmless-looking furry purple critter comes rolling out to ask you for directions to the nearest Taco Bell drive-through. What do you do?
11. Same scenario as #10, only now the alien requests a DVD to show him the finest TV that Earth's culture has to offer and to keep his kids from fighting in the backseat on his way back to Naboo. What, if anything, do you place into his eager tentacles?
Aaaand that concludes this exciting edition of "Amanda does random things instead of writing or cleaning her apartment." Tune in next time, when I will either have drawn a random comic or gotten unaccountably passionate about something I saw on TV.
If it's the latter, that something will probably look like this and shoot a mean crossbow...
