Quote:
Originally Posted by Archon_Wing
Well, we may not be reading the same posts. Let's see how I broke down Reckoner's post
Implies that emotion causes drama to happen.
Emotion is very important, for w/o it there's no story.
Implies that emotion can impair their life or their judgement.
That pretty much implies they'd pick the most rational solution, if it weren't for emotional issues and problems stopping them from seeing the issues objectively.
Maybe that's a bit too much and I don't necessarily agree they have to be that foolish, but it implies that in a drama, people aren't at 100% mental capacity.
Suggests that emotional trauma and the reawakening of these things enables foolish actions (to us) to be reasonable in context.
I don't necessarily agree with it completely, but that's how I saw it.
|
No. I don't claim to know what he
meant, but what he
wrote is that stupidity is
necessary for there to be drama.
I'm fine with people being stupid, and for that stupidity to cause drama. Because, realistically, there is no shortage of stupidity. But saying stupidity's a condition sine qua non for drama is ultimately just an excuse for lazy writing, based on characters being atypically stupid to fit the needs of the plot rather than driving it with their normal personalities.