I've been looking at the stats and noticed.
If you are from Denmark?
Hvis De kommer fra Danmark?
HI YA. De kom tilbage? Velkommen. Hvordan vil De? Hvad musik hører de efter? Hvad vil De læser?
Tak for besøgende min blog.
Anne
English translation?
Hi ya. You came back? Welcome. How are you? What music are you listening too? What are you reading?
Thank you for visiting my blog.
Anne
If you are from France?
Si vous êtes la France.
HiYa. Vous êtes revenu ? Bienvenue. Comment allez-vous ? Quelle musique écoutez-vous ? Quels livres êtes-vous lisant ?
Merci de visiter mon blog !
Ann
If you are from the US and from England?
Hi Ya and welcome! Thank you for visiting my blog! What music are you listening to? What books are you reading? Hope you have a great day.
Anne
Now to the next blog?
Well, AuthorAnn is a bit cranky.
Have lots to do this weekend so there's not much in the way of writing but that should change by Monday.
Hugs,
Ann
Friday, January 28, 2011
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Incase you just got here...
Agenda for Jan 27,2011-
First read this
http://12dotsandablot.blogspot.com/2011/01/writing-for-twitter-is-different.html
Then go here
http://12dotsandablot.blogspot.com
It's been a long day.
.
Hugs,
AuthorAnn
,
First read this
http://12dotsandablot.blogspot.com/2011/01/writing-for-twitter-is-different.html
Then go here
http://12dotsandablot.blogspot.com
It's been a long day.
.
Hugs,
AuthorAnn
,
I wonder...
.
...what this guy could do if he had the budget to make a movie?
Well?
I love the Nerdist.
.
...what this guy could do if he had the budget to make a movie?
Well?
I love the Nerdist.
.
Watch this space.
.
Was looking for this
Or why "cutting edge" in the age of multiple international communication isn't just for the new.
It's for the reinvented.
"At any moment, we can find and then co mingle just about any point in time and then send it off into the world. In an instant."
"Past is reinvented into the future with a click."
both quotes CAnneFord 27January,2010
.
.
.
Was looking for this
Or why "cutting edge" in the age of multiple international communication isn't just for the new.
It's for the reinvented.
"At any moment, we can find and then co mingle just about any point in time and then send it off into the world. In an instant."
"Past is reinvented into the future with a click."
both quotes CAnneFord 27January,2010
.
.
.
Writing for Twitter is different...
.
As mentioned before, I used to write a blog that was pretty well received. The most popular blog posts were the InteractiveBlogStories. These stories allowed the,Gentle Reader, to chose the plot line. After awhile, you could have multiple story lines by just adding planned or random hot links. It was great fun to write but very hard work. At first, it was just an experiment that I used to compare plot lines, create characters, or just to keep me from getting bored. After a while I learned to plan ahead for the plot and story arch. Since I was also learning about how the computer works in a practical sense, it was in it's heart of hearts an intuitive practice. When I finally found out how to link within my blog and to other parts of the Internet, it finally became, for me, a new way to write. It was a kind of living and breathing story book. Thanks to Youtube, the pictures came alive through words or songs and the links helped to provide an ever changing story.
Now, I'm trying to take the InteractiveBlogStory to Twitter.
For this writer? It's not been easy.
Today, I learned that typing @ with someones twitter name didn't take my comment to a website that the recipient could read later, oh no, it also could cause their cellphone to tweet. I honestly didn't know that. Now I do.
Now true, this might be a good thing to do if it's okay with the person who you are tweeting, it's a very bad idea to tweet folks who you don't know.
So rule number 1 with writing for Twitter.
If you write an InteractiveStory using Twitter, write the story but only include one active @ link to the person in question. I think that it would be okay to use @ then space then the twitter name. I know it's okay to use the #tag or the #FF because they won't cause the Twitter post to annoy another Tweeter.
But DO NOT DO NOT. Tweet the @ then tweeter's name unless they know that you will do that OR it's to WB. He's used to it.
That's it.
I'm hoping that this will be the end of this lesson learned. I'm hoping that I won't be banned for life or something else.
Mercy for a very contrite writer.
.
AuthorAnn
PS. The possibilities for InteractiveStories using the Twitter medium is really good. You can't be "werdy". The story arch has to be short. But I like haiku and the short story format with quick link so that's actually good. I do miss the magazine like format of the blog so for those times? I'll use the blogs but for quick, real time stories, I can live with the Twitter format. Plus I can finally find a way to write for the mobile phone marked. I know, I know this has already been done in places like Japan but that doesn't mean it's still not viable.
WB will ask me if it can make money. Not sure.
Will see.
Back to work (By the way, why didn't anyone tell me about that lovely Dr.Who show. The one with all the interlaping story lines. Honestly, it's been on for 50 years and I'm just now finding it out? Sheesh)
.
.
As mentioned before, I used to write a blog that was pretty well received. The most popular blog posts were the InteractiveBlogStories. These stories allowed the,Gentle Reader, to chose the plot line. After awhile, you could have multiple story lines by just adding planned or random hot links. It was great fun to write but very hard work. At first, it was just an experiment that I used to compare plot lines, create characters, or just to keep me from getting bored. After a while I learned to plan ahead for the plot and story arch. Since I was also learning about how the computer works in a practical sense, it was in it's heart of hearts an intuitive practice. When I finally found out how to link within my blog and to other parts of the Internet, it finally became, for me, a new way to write. It was a kind of living and breathing story book. Thanks to Youtube, the pictures came alive through words or songs and the links helped to provide an ever changing story.
Now, I'm trying to take the InteractiveBlogStory to Twitter.
For this writer? It's not been easy.
Today, I learned that typing @ with someones twitter name didn't take my comment to a website that the recipient could read later, oh no, it also could cause their cellphone to tweet. I honestly didn't know that. Now I do.
Now true, this might be a good thing to do if it's okay with the person who you are tweeting, it's a very bad idea to tweet folks who you don't know.
So rule number 1 with writing for Twitter.
If you write an InteractiveStory using Twitter, write the story but only include one active @ link to the person in question. I think that it would be okay to use @ then space then the twitter name. I know it's okay to use the #tag or the #FF because they won't cause the Twitter post to annoy another Tweeter.
But DO NOT DO NOT. Tweet the @ then tweeter's name unless they know that you will do that OR it's to WB. He's used to it.
That's it.
I'm hoping that this will be the end of this lesson learned. I'm hoping that I won't be banned for life or something else.
Mercy for a very contrite writer.
.
AuthorAnn
PS. The possibilities for InteractiveStories using the Twitter medium is really good. You can't be "werdy". The story arch has to be short. But I like haiku and the short story format with quick link so that's actually good. I do miss the magazine like format of the blog so for those times? I'll use the blogs but for quick, real time stories, I can live with the Twitter format. Plus I can finally find a way to write for the mobile phone marked. I know, I know this has already been done in places like Japan but that doesn't mean it's still not viable.
WB will ask me if it can make money. Not sure.
Will see.
Back to work (By the way, why didn't anyone tell me about that lovely Dr.Who show. The one with all the interlaping story lines. Honestly, it's been on for 50 years and I'm just now finding it out? Sheesh)
.
.
Does anyone know if ...
.
"Does anyone know if the piano they found off the coast of Miami Beach works? I could really use a new piano.
This mouth organ is giving me chapped lips.
.
:D
AuthorAnn
Sigh, okay "explaination". See the quote above said "...chapped lips..." and this song is by the Flaming Lips and... please don't make me explain. Seriously. I'm not doing it.
I'm going to sleep now.
And I know that as I sleep, peaceful, that Yoshimi will battle those Pink Robots and keep us all safe with their songs.
Hugs!
Enjoy the music.
.
.
I had a reason to...
.
Hurray.
Was going to make the following statement.
It's Thursday and I am very much alive and happy, Yesterday, Wednesday was beautiful. WB came home early and we went to get the washing machine.
Tomorrow (hopefully) the long search for the washing machine will be over. After all the looking, the Internet searching, the measuring, and waiting for it to arrive, it's finally here. The new one is out of it's crate, hooked up, and (almost) ready to go. The only problem it that we have to re hook up the vent so that it won't be twisted. I can't be excited until we're sure that it is indeed level and working. So far so good. It's a beautiful machine.
And it looks like it will be able to wash our clothes, towels, sheets, blankets... just about everything that we have to wash. I'm still a bit worried about the furry blanket. That would be huge even for the old washing machine. I have devised a laundry schedule that should work so that we aren't washing huge amounts of laundry at anyone time. I've used this schedule when Pup was little, so I know it works. Always clean clothes and towels. This is a good schedule for a family who has a washer and dryer (or clothes line) at home.
It goes like this:
Monday towel day (all the towels in the clothes hamper)
Tuesday clothes day for one person (all dirty clothes in their closet hamper)
Wednesday clothes for a second family member(all dirty clothes in their closet hamper)
Thursday clothes for a third family member (same as above)
Friday either clothes for a fourth family member or another towel day
Saturday sheets each week/shower curtain and/blankets once a month also kitchen towels
Sunday nothing. no clothes washing on this day.
I used to have Tuesday-Thursday as a different color laundry or white clothing day but it was tedious separate and ti put up clothing for different people. Now it's a day devoted to each family member or two if you have to double up. Because no one family member dirties up that many clothes, it's actually not too bad. I have a clothes sorter and each person has their own laundry basket/dirty clothes basket. Just bring it to the washer, sort the clothes in the clothes sorter, wipe out the laundry basket (the plastic kind) with a disinfectant wipe that I'll keep next to the washing machine, then put the clean clothes back into that same clothes basket. Either the person who's clothes are being washed comes and gets their clean clothes at night or I'll put them on their bed. This worked for us before and has the benefit of getting put a laundry basket/gear when he moves to his own place. The first week that I tried it, I kept thinking, "Ah ha. So this is what it feels like to have all the wash you need to or plan to do done before midnight. No more mountain of laundry or searching about to wash clothes. Unless it's something unforeseen, clothes get washed without lots of stress. Yay." I recommend this method if you're not domestically inclined because once you get the system set up you don't have to think about it. Everyone knows that towels are on Monday nights and Friday mornings, they know when their laundry day is incase they need something special washed, and it's designed to that the people who use the dry cleaners can have them ready to take to work with them. Sigh. I love clean laundry but hate to do it. This is the only way I've found to keep us sane and in clothes. Even Pup, who normally doesn't really care about laundry, is glad to see it here.
In case you're interested.
The good news is that, while the washing machine is slightly smaller, there is so much more room in the closet. The machine is actually two machines in one. There's a washer on the bottom and a dryer on the top. This means that the part where the dryer was located is not free space. We NEED the storage space. Plenty of room for brooms, the ironing board, the iron, buckets and still have a place to hang clothes. I'm hoping to install a shelf or two for laundry detergent. In the past I've stored this type of thing in a small plastic laundry basket. That way if any thing spilled, it would spill into the basket and not on the machine or onto the floor. This worked because I could store everything needed into one space and the basket had a solid bottom. LOL Never knew I'd be this happy about laundry but it costs a small fortune to wash and dry clothes at the laundry mat. This works.
I'm not particularly good at housework, but even I'm excited.
LOL Hugs, it's really good to have a washing machine again.
AuthorAnn and now slightly more domestic Ann.
:D
.
Hurray.
Was going to make the following statement.
It's Thursday and I am very much alive and happy, Yesterday, Wednesday was beautiful. WB came home early and we went to get the washing machine.
Tomorrow (hopefully) the long search for the washing machine will be over. After all the looking, the Internet searching, the measuring, and waiting for it to arrive, it's finally here. The new one is out of it's crate, hooked up, and (almost) ready to go. The only problem it that we have to re hook up the vent so that it won't be twisted. I can't be excited until we're sure that it is indeed level and working. So far so good. It's a beautiful machine.
And it looks like it will be able to wash our clothes, towels, sheets, blankets... just about everything that we have to wash. I'm still a bit worried about the furry blanket. That would be huge even for the old washing machine. I have devised a laundry schedule that should work so that we aren't washing huge amounts of laundry at anyone time. I've used this schedule when Pup was little, so I know it works. Always clean clothes and towels. This is a good schedule for a family who has a washer and dryer (or clothes line) at home.
It goes like this:
Monday towel day (all the towels in the clothes hamper)
Tuesday clothes day for one person (all dirty clothes in their closet hamper)
Wednesday clothes for a second family member(all dirty clothes in their closet hamper)
Thursday clothes for a third family member (same as above)
Friday either clothes for a fourth family member or another towel day
Saturday sheets each week/shower curtain and/blankets once a month also kitchen towels
Sunday nothing. no clothes washing on this day.
I used to have Tuesday-Thursday as a different color laundry or white clothing day but it was tedious separate and ti put up clothing for different people. Now it's a day devoted to each family member or two if you have to double up. Because no one family member dirties up that many clothes, it's actually not too bad. I have a clothes sorter and each person has their own laundry basket/dirty clothes basket. Just bring it to the washer, sort the clothes in the clothes sorter, wipe out the laundry basket (the plastic kind) with a disinfectant wipe that I'll keep next to the washing machine, then put the clean clothes back into that same clothes basket. Either the person who's clothes are being washed comes and gets their clean clothes at night or I'll put them on their bed. This worked for us before and has the benefit of getting put a laundry basket/gear when he moves to his own place. The first week that I tried it, I kept thinking, "Ah ha. So this is what it feels like to have all the wash you need to or plan to do done before midnight. No more mountain of laundry or searching about to wash clothes. Unless it's something unforeseen, clothes get washed without lots of stress. Yay." I recommend this method if you're not domestically inclined because once you get the system set up you don't have to think about it. Everyone knows that towels are on Monday nights and Friday mornings, they know when their laundry day is incase they need something special washed, and it's designed to that the people who use the dry cleaners can have them ready to take to work with them. Sigh. I love clean laundry but hate to do it. This is the only way I've found to keep us sane and in clothes. Even Pup, who normally doesn't really care about laundry, is glad to see it here.
In case you're interested.
The good news is that, while the washing machine is slightly smaller, there is so much more room in the closet. The machine is actually two machines in one. There's a washer on the bottom and a dryer on the top. This means that the part where the dryer was located is not free space. We NEED the storage space. Plenty of room for brooms, the ironing board, the iron, buckets and still have a place to hang clothes. I'm hoping to install a shelf or two for laundry detergent. In the past I've stored this type of thing in a small plastic laundry basket. That way if any thing spilled, it would spill into the basket and not on the machine or onto the floor. This worked because I could store everything needed into one space and the basket had a solid bottom. LOL Never knew I'd be this happy about laundry but it costs a small fortune to wash and dry clothes at the laundry mat. This works.
I'm not particularly good at housework, but even I'm excited.
LOL Hugs, it's really good to have a washing machine again.
AuthorAnn and now slightly more domestic Ann.
:D
.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Good morning!
.
Læsere fra Danmark.
God dag! Hvordan vil De?
Translation:
Readers from Denmark.
Good day! How are you?
Finally a reason to watch that horse. Yay Chris @nerdist on the tweety mail!!!
Dear Gentle Readers,
Sorry that I didn't finish the last post. Lest anyone think that I was being snotty to the folks at the nerdist?
Nope.
No
Nada.
I had a fantastic time reading one of the blog posts. Subject? Time travel. Much fun and interesting.
I know that I didn't finish the last post. Don't have time to this morning. As I was about to turn on the computer and finish said post, I was over come with the desire to sleep.
So I did.
Which is good becaue I feel much better this morning. Thank goodness it's neither raining or freezing or gloomy for that matter.
Rested, sunny mood, things to do? Yay.
And head to toe? I smell delicious. Especially this part on the neck. Right here behind my ear. Hmmmmmmm.
Have things to do today so no more writing until late tonight or perhaps tomorrow.
Til then? Tweet me @GoatHerderBoy
Hugs,
,
LOL @craigyferg being the Huggy Bear of late night. LOL I wish.
.
Læsere fra Danmark.
God dag! Hvordan vil De?
Translation:
Readers from Denmark.
Good day! How are you?
Finally a reason to watch that horse. Yay Chris @nerdist on the tweety mail!!!
Dear Gentle Readers,
Sorry that I didn't finish the last post. Lest anyone think that I was being snotty to the folks at the nerdist?
Nope.
No
Nada.
I had a fantastic time reading one of the blog posts. Subject? Time travel. Much fun and interesting.
I know that I didn't finish the last post. Don't have time to this morning. As I was about to turn on the computer and finish said post, I was over come with the desire to sleep.
So I did.
Which is good becaue I feel much better this morning. Thank goodness it's neither raining or freezing or gloomy for that matter.
Rested, sunny mood, things to do? Yay.
And head to toe? I smell delicious. Especially this part on the neck. Right here behind my ear. Hmmmmmmm.
Have things to do today so no more writing until late tonight or perhaps tomorrow.
Til then? Tweet me @GoatHerderBoy
Hugs,
,
LOL @craigyferg being the Huggy Bear of late night. LOL I wish.
.
So I was reading the Nerdist webpage
.
I am sooo happy.
There on the nerdist ( @nerdist on Twitter ) was an entire blog post devoted to the trouble with timelines in writing and just how important is it for a writer to be mindful of continuity.
I used to do Interactive Blog Stories on a pseudo diary type blog. It was actually a writer's journal in a way. I'd write about the current events in my life and the world that surrounded each day and then would write poetry and short stories and -
Anyway.
I started referring to past posts and then documenting that on the actual past post. It was interesting to study memory versus the "at the moment" posting. For me, it was like going back in time. Kind of -
Anyway again.
Hey.
(next day. I was going to come right back but something came up. :D)
So about this blog. After a while of writing and referring back to older posts it got me to thinking about going back in time. Each time I referred back to the older posts, now this was from different points in time both before and after the date in question, I could note if there was something I'd do differently or note how going back might have changed the future. Then I would give the Gentle Readers who were reading it the option of going forward or backward by making choices. It was alot of fun. Kind of like a carnival ride throug someone's imagination. The thing was it also made me mindful of the importance of the job of what we like to call The Continuity Fairy. This is the imaginary or real folks who keep up with this type of thing. The ones who have a keen eye for detail or a remarkable memory. It's important and yes it's annoying when important elements, key elements, are forgotten. It can also create havoc in the story. Those unintended consequences and illogical posts like this one from last night:
.
....
Don't read the rest just yet. I have to go to the restroom. And this blog post isn't finished
AND
This next part won't make sense without further explaination.
Baring unforeseen flood or famine, I should be back to finish within the next 15 minutes.
Anne
.
.
Now to answer the question posed on the Nerdist webpage,
Is continuity important in a long running play or television show (like Dr. Who).
To which I replied?
Absolutely not.
So much time devoted to this subject when actually the answer is clear to anyone who's watched a long running soap.
Things change.
AND?
Even the Continuity Fairies screw up from time to time.
It's a hard job being a Continuity Fairy. When you have a story line that's not just linear its also overlapping you can miss stuff. It's not like traveling back on Memory Lane is just well a memory.
Stuff happens.
You do your best to keep it all straight and then when someone points out a tiny little flaw you deny OR you make more stuff up to "patch up" the little riffle in the "space time continum " to fix it.
Easy peasy.
Hugs and kisses.
GHB
PS One should not confuse the Continuity Fairies with the Incontinent Fairies. The Continuity Fairies are the patron saints of writers. They are that loyal band of editors and fans who help writers keep on the straight and narrow of a story so that if they have a continuity accident, it can be fixed. This allows them, the writers, to keep their jobs and thus their kids in school or to make the car payments. The Incontinent Fairies are the patron saints of tiny old people and dogs. They watch after the tiny old people and dogs so that if they have and "accident" it will be out in the yard and not on the new couch.
Very important difference.
Both are very busy and have been known to become distracted by their real life and can miss things.
.
Tootles.
.
Does Continuity Interfere With Storytelling?
by Kyle Anderson on January 4, 2011
Any long running story — generally TV shows, but occasionally movie franchises — is bound to be steeped in a deep and rich continuity, stuff that has happened before affecting the current spate of stories. This is a phenomenon that’s bound to happen. Even shows that are particularly episodic, like the now-defunct Law & Order, would sometimes be forced to reference past events. They had to; the characters do not become clean slates every 49th minute.
Science Fiction series are especially mired down by continuity that their core of die-hard fans will defend to the end of time. It’s these fans who will go on message boards and complain until their fingers bleed that a new episode does something, no matter how minuscule, that disrupts the fabric of the past, or at the very least ignores something once thought sacred. But, is it sacred? Shouldn’t the most important part of storytelling be telling a good story?
As many of you will know, I watch an inordinate amount of Doctor Who, from all eras, and a show that’s been on for the better part of 50 years is bound to have a huge amount of continuity built up that the fans, some of the most fervent of the lot, accept as gospel.
In the 1972 story “Day of the Daleks,” a concept is offered up to explain why it’s a bad thing for a person (or object) to physically interact with itself should it travel in time and cross its own timeline. Should one do so, they would cause a paradox resulting in the destruction of the universe or the sudden death of puppies or something else awful. The fictional name for the concept the story’s writer gave is the now-famous “Blinovitch Limitation Effect.” For the purposes of the story at hand, it was a plot point to add an extra layer of tension as well as providing a quick explanation as to why the Doctor, or anyone for that matter, could not simply try again if he screwed something up the first time around. It’s a novel idea and, as time travel is largely speculative anyway, it seems just as plausible as anything else. It was a function of that story and for that story it worked.
The term and concept are mentioned a few more times throughout the show’s long history, but I’ll just talk about two specifically. In the 1983 story “Mawdryn Undead,” the Doctor and his companion Turlough are in 1983, while his other two companions, Nyssa and Tegan, are in 1977, both groups encountering the Brigadier. Eventually, all of them end up in the same space ship at the same time, and it becomes imperative, along with the rest of the bad stuff happening in the story, that they have to keep the two Brigadiers away from each other, lest the universe implode.
Again, in the 2005 story “Father’s Day,” the Ninth Doctor takes Rose to witness her father’s death in a car accident (what a morbid person she is), and, instead, she decides to save him, thus creating a rift in space and time for big flying dinosaur-like beasts called Reapers, which feed off of time distortions. At one point, Rose actually physically touches her infant self and causes a whole other mess of crap to happen. Like “Day of the Daleks,” the Blinovitch Limitation Effect is used as a story modifier, a plot point that propels the action.
Two recent Doctor Who stories choose to ignore the BLE, despite it being part of the show’s continuity. In the series 5 finale, “The Big Bang,” the Doctor and Rory touch sonic screwdrivers and a big spark occurs, proving to the Doctor that they are indeed the same screwdriver at different points in its timeline, yet, later, adult Amy Pond pats child Amelia Pond on the head briefly. Nothing happens. Later still, the Doctor clutches his ten-minutes-earlier self and whispers a secret, again with no real detriment. In the context of this story, this can be explained away by saying the universe was in the middle of blowing up anyway and any paradoxical behavior would have no further influence on it. Kind of like shooting a dead body; what’s one more bullet hole if the guy’s already snuffed it?
Still, in the recent Christmas special, Kazran Sardick (played by Michael Gambon) physically interacts with himself as a child, and there’s absolutely no mention of it being a bad thing. This, too, can be explained away, which I won’t do for anyone who hasn’t seen it, but my question is: does it matter? To a lot of people, it did. Fan forums and podcasts have spoken in-depth about how it spits in the face of the show to do something like that. Part of me will always notice things like that and think, “Hey, wait a minute,” but the other part of me says, “Man, that’s a really great moment in that character’s arc.” It’s things like this that cause Kyle the fan and Kyle the writer come to blows. Obviously, in the course of hundreds of hours of adventures, story points will become part of that show’s lore, but should they stand in the way of someone telling a good story NOW?
In both cases, the writer Steven Moffat (who’s always played fast and loose with continuity) is telling a very particular fable using this long-established character and realm as his lead and both are exceedingly well-told. Neither story would be nearly as effective if they steadfastly adhered to a story point dreamt up almost 40 years ago. And, let us not forget, even the classic series chose to gloss over the esteemed Limitation Effect when it suited the storytelling. In the stories “The Three Doctors,” “The Five Doctors,” and “The Two Doctors,” the Doctor’s previous and current incarnations cross paths with each other and nothing is said about it and they all occurred post-Blinovitch.
It's My Party
What happens when people stick too closely to the more arbitrary parts of a series’ backlog of stuff is that it limits what you can and cannot do and, especially in sci-fi or fantasy, the only limits should be the writer’s imagination. For a moment, let’s leave the world of Who for the murkier waters of Star Wars. If I remember correctly, and countless frustrated fist-clenchings have proven I do, the sole purpose of the prequels was to further continuity. Remember how well those turned out? It seems the only thing George Lucas did, from a purely storytelling standpoint, was to take every reference to the past made in the original trilogy and visually depict it in the prequels. Some things have plot holes that need to be tied up, but I think I was pretty good without knowing that Darth Vader used to be a whiny, petulant cry-baby who murdered kids at the behest of a fairly unconvincing mentor. It somehow diminishes the effect of the original trilogy. Darth Vader was a blank slate when he appeared in 1977 and yet audiences still got the gist that he was the bad guy. And Lucas even went a step further by changing the ORIGINAL films to be perfectly aligned with the crap he made up in the prequels. Retconning is usual a function of making the past fit the story you’re now telling, but making stuff in the future fit the stuff in the past is proactive continuity, or Proconning. What a waste of energy. It’s much less important to me that Boba Fett have the voice of Jango Fett from Episode II than it is who the character is and what he represents. I can’t decide if it’s a fan-wank or just a Lucas-wank.
And it’s not just Star Wars. I know everyone bitches about the prequels, and have done in a far more detailed and articulate way (see: Red Letter Media), so let’s take something else. The tv show LOST was a twisty, turny, confusing mush of science, mysticism, and soap-opera. In the third season, the show introduced two characters, the hated Paulo and Nikki, who were supposed to have been there on the island for as long as everybody else. But why are we only now seeing them? The writers spent such a long time trying to explain where the two of them were during all the rest of the episodes we’ve already seen that they forsook (an actual word by the way) other, more interesting storylines. In the final season, the show had so many unanswered continuity questions that they couldn’t possibly attend to all of them, and thus didn’t. In this case, the lack of continuity got in the way of enjoying the story that was being presented.
I'll Do What I Want!
Part of the fun of watching series for many years is that you can see how action leads to reaction on a grander scale. It’s like pieces of a puzzle finally being put in the right order while finding new pieces you didn’t even know were there. Some things, though, are merely window dressing to help a particular story and should not be held up as truth spoken by the Lawgiver. Steven Moffat has been quoted as saying a show about time travel can never have an official continuity, which is a clever way of saying he’s going to write whatever the fuck he wants and that’s that, which I can really respect. Nothing was shaken up to the point of being unrecognizable, nor was anything about the core belief of the character changed or misrepresented. Where’s the harm, I ask you? There comes a point where the writer just needs to tell a story the best way he or she knows how and suffer through the handful of fans who’ll complain that it goes against everything the show represents. They’re still watching and will keep watching, and, really, that’s what it’s all about.
Share and Enjoy:
19 comments
{ 19 comments… read them below or add one }
yogahz January 4, 2011 at 8:59 am
Thanks for this article Kyle.
I don’t mind when the writer changes the rules – in that I agree with Moffat, but it always takes me out of the story (Amy patting Amelia) until I’m drawn back in by the same story. It’s usually a moment that merits breaking the rules.
Themonk January 4, 2011 at 9:22 am
As a life-long fan of sci-fi I understand the frustration of continuity conflicts. I’ve witnessed them countless times, and have finally come to the conclusion that they are an inherent part of the beauty of the genre. Continuity conflicts will always be present in stories that cover long periods of time…period…just as no one is ever truly dead or destroyed in sci-fi because some writer will invariably invent some way to resurrect them if or when needed in later story lines.
Lisa G January 4, 2011 at 9:32 am
Rule #1:
“Never let the facts get in the way of telling a great story.”
As a writer as well as a geeky fangirl of every franchise you mentioned, neither part of my brain is bothered when something current appears to contradict something prior. Hell, even Shakespeare screwed with history and geography, knowing they weren’t as important to a story as character and relationships.
There will always be literal, linear people who get their undies in a bunch at the tiniest bit of untidiness, in stories or in life. The rest of us like to surf the chaos and enjoy the fun. As long as a story justifies itself within itself, it can tweak any history or cannon as much as it wants. I’ll suspend my disbelief and keep munching my popcorn.
Del Coro January 4, 2011 at 10:23 am
If Amy patting her younger self on the head “takes you out of the story,” you’re doing it wrong.
Joe January 4, 2011 at 10:30 am
I was just having a discussion on another site about how Dungeon Masters in D&D live in the worlds they create and players just visit them.
It is sort of the opposite with shows. The writers visit the shows for the episodes they write and the viewers live in and obsess over them.
The end result being that the visitors do not care about continuity or the long term story only about what is happening when they visit.
Chris W. January 4, 2011 at 11:00 am
I agree with all you wrote.
That said, there does rest on the writer a modicum of responsibility to the audience to regard continuity. The writer is hoping that the audience will invest time in a piece of work. Part of that investment is to take what has happened as either important or just part of the story. To then take that investment and say, “oh nevermind audience, forget what you saw, here’s something else…the real story I want to tell” is forsaking that responsibility.
Why would an audience invest time in a serialized show if the writer doesn’t feel beholden to the universe of their story? I wouldn’t waste my time if I knew that the next season the writer was just going to ignore all the things from the previous season.
yogahz January 4, 2011 at 11:07 am
@ Del Coro
All I meant was that in that gesture I thought of the “Blinovitch Limitation Effect” even though it had no role. I easily and quickly moved on.
So what’s the right way?
Stacy January 4, 2011 at 11:21 am
As far as the paradox in the Big Bang story, I assumed it didn’t create a paradox because that was how the original events played out. Amy makes a comment about remembering being there when she was a child. And the paradox didn’t happen when the Doctor whispered something to himself, because that’s what originally happened. I can’t explain the sonic screw driver thing though.
After watching the Three Doctor’s, the paradox thing did cross my mind, but I filled it in with the story like above… maybe the Doctor’s did all this in their own time lines, and off camera each of the older Doctor’s were saying “Ah, yeah… I remember this – well, let’s get on with it.” And the Doctor just had amnesia about his recorder each time…
I enjoyed Steven Moffat’s writing on Coupling and on the other Doctor Who stories he’s done in the past. I probably get more excited seeing Moffat’s name fly across the screen than seeing Davies’.
I’m with Lisa on this one – and I hope she will kindly pass the popcorn
Mammaklehm January 4, 2011 at 12:27 pm
I think as long as a writer is mostly respectful of the past small mis-steps are fine. Better not to complain too much and make a beloved writer want to quit the series!
Plus, a lot of pointing out errors is more the fans proving they know the series than anything else.
Doc January 4, 2011 at 3:18 pm
There’s a certain amount of nerd-foam that appears whenever these sorts of discussions, eh, erupt. I’d like to pretend I don’t care, but I don’t. Which is to say, I do, but only to the degree when the entire thing becomes a distraction. It’s interesting that the Amy/Amelia point was raised. I thought, “Whoa,” when I saw that, but it didn’t raise any alarms. Moffat is very good at retrofitting tiny points into larger storyline arcs, where what seems to be incidental kicks off sequence of events that ends up with… well… who knows? There may indeed be a problem that arises from that contact… but it hasn’t materialized yet. Since we’ve never actually experienced “the end of everything”, nobody knows what it looks like.
Dalek January 4, 2011 at 5:14 pm
Continuity is what makes a story. Things happen and then things happen based on those events. Consequences are what make a long story interesting. What interferes with storytelling is bad storytelling.
A good example is STTNG: Forces of Nature. Someone thought it would be cool to do an episode where warp drive was discovered to have harmful effects on space. They put a limit on it at the end of the story and then have to mention permission to exceed it in a few episodes down the line. Then they just stop mentioning it all together. Any time someone asks, they mumble something about how “it must have been solved off camera”
It’s not a very good story and it creates a lot of unnecessary work later on down the line so that they can ignore the consequences of the story. Then they just get rid of the consequences entirely. Maybe it just shouldn’t have been written at all.
PapaFrita January 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm
Continuity is a powerful tool when you’ve got a whole story planned out. That way little things from earlier in the series can become big deals later and feel like good storytelling. It works well for comedic effect as well (Arrested Development, The Venture Bros). On a show like Dr. Who, though, trying to work continuity across decades and different writers/directors/producers is impossible. Moffit is right to do whatever he likes.
Charles January 4, 2011 at 5:46 pm
Large long-running universes get complex and missing some bit of continuity can be expected and mostly ignored. But, as a fan, what gets to me is that much of it is just plain stupid. The Star Trek franchise was loaded with them, with Brannon Braga often making fun of the fans for their notices of continuity problems. Some would say that this arrogance ran the franchise into the ground. One problem in STTNG has already been pointed out. In another episode they beamed through shields, even though it’s always been canon that you can’t beam through shields. Why did they do that? I think they just didn’t care. It would have take a tiny bit of extra thought to make the same story just as good and exciting without this stupid mistake and they would not have the wrath of fans like myself to deal with. Instead, they were lazy.
Art is always straining against boundaries. Often it is those boundaries that make art great. Pushing the boundaries is fine, but ignoring them is dumb. Would you be okay if Dr. Who suddenly turned out to be a Dalek in disguise for one episode because some writer wrote a great “Dr. Who is really a Dalek” episode? (“It’s a twist,” as they say on Robot Chicken). Too many writers like to claim they are better than continuity, but are really just too lazy to come up with a story just as good, but without the disruptive elements that make anyone who knows the universe cringe.
Please consider also, even in your editorial, your engagement in a story was temporarily interrupted as you thought of how a basic idea has been disregarded. Interestingly, the part of you that considered this okay is the part (the writer) that is not in the vast majority of the viewing public. Is this distraction a good idea?
Gabriel January 4, 2011 at 7:30 pm
I think the most convoluted continuity problems I have seen were in DC comics. I remember the Crisis on Infinite Earths series from the 80′s when I was a kid. They tried to clean up all the continuity problems so the fanboys would quit their bitching. In the end this is all made up. The story you are telling is more important that some other story. If you can reference in a way that is good for your story great. If not don’t worry about it.
Zil January 4, 2011 at 9:32 pm
I hafta say I agree with Stacy–it might be because things are supposed to happen this way in certain instances.
Galadriel January 4, 2011 at 11:32 pm
Great piece, Kyle! I suspect you’ve been hanging out at DoctorWhoTV, reading our discussions… or perhaps participating in them? Anyway, I absolutely agree with Chris W. and Charles and have more to add:
There’s a fine line to walk here. Writers with high positions and power–just like powerful people in government and business–believe they can do whatever they want, and they often get away with it. The results usually range from disappointing to disastrous. The Star Wars prequels are good examples: moneymakers without great storytelling. I’m keeping my hopes up re: Steven Moffat, but he’s starting to trend toward Lucas-ness. We writers trying to break in are the ones forced to attend to every detail in our work, which means our writing often has much better continuity than the stuff from those guys already sittin’ pretty. We must have ultimate respect for our audience/readers; they are the ones who make or break us, whether they are agents, editors, fans, producers, etc.
So my point (and I do have one!) is that blatantly thumbing your nose at established rules of beloved stories–and at their fans–just because you can is bad storytelling in itself. If a writer thinks his story must bend the rules to be its best, then he should do it in a respectful, briefly explanatory way, as we aspiring writers must do to gain our place in the world. (Of course, then our bosses get to mess up all that work to make it “marketable”… but then it’s not the writer’s fault!)
Sometimes all it takes to keep (most) fans happy is a line like, “We don’t talk about that” (Worf?) when the issue of Klingons looking different through the years came up in ST:DS9. Ignoring the issue would have been lazy and ridiculous; attending to it was entertaining… while leaving open fan speculation on genetic engineering, etc.
So yes, bend the rules if your story demands it… but do it with grace and care and respect, and you’ll retain the respect of your audience.
Eric January 6, 2011 at 1:26 pm
But but but… what about those two Cybermen wandering the TARDIS???!?!
PapaFrita January 7, 2011 at 2:38 pm
Can you really base the continuity of Dr. Who based on the idea that it’s all one continuous story? It’d be different if there was an intended ending to the grand story, but it’s not that kind of show. The character of the Doctor continues, but as he changes his face and personality, so does the tone and style of each season. It’s more like a reboot, really, than the next chapter in a continuing series. Moffat is writing about his own Doctor in a similar way that Christopher Nolan is writing about his own Batman.
Daniel January 18, 2011 at 12:58 pm
I didn’t think there was any ridiculous turn of Dr Who that could get to me since it’s such a ball of nonsense anyway, and I have great affection for it, flying sharks and all. So I was surprised when the travel in your own timeline aspect really bothered me. Two big reasons: first, an entire, memorable episode of the new series devoted to why this can never happen (giant bat monsters come and eat you), and second, and this is obvious, to avoid the Bill & Ted problem: any problem could just be solved via time travel – and you have unlimited chances to get things right. So to me this limitation is an essential part of how the show works, as much as the Doctor not shooting people. The christmas carol time travelling was moving but just not right for Dr Who. I am definitely enjoying Steven Moffatt’s version overall, but I regard this as a major mistake and I hope it never happens again. (somehow Blink gets by with me…)
Leave a Comment
Name *
E-mail *
Website
Previous post: Life With The Lions
Next post: Adventures At CES, Prologue: We Were Somewhere Around Barstow….
POPULAR POSTS
Nerdist Podcast #54 - KEVIN SMITH
Rugrats Dalek Easter Egg
Tasmania=Pubes
Not Since Fred 'Twinkletoes' Flintstone....
SEARCH
CATEGORIES
Animals
Art
Books
Charity
Coffee
Comedy
Comics
Contests
DIY/HowTo
Environment
Film
Food
Found
G4
Games
General Nerdism
Health
HnP
Muppets
Music
News
Pics
Podcast
Products
Review
Science
Sex
Shirts
Space
Sports
Stand-Up
Television
Travel
Uncategorized
Unsolicited Advice
Video
Wallpaper
Watches
Web/Tech
Wired
SURF BY TAG
Apple AT&T Attack of the Show awesome back to the future book review Books Bowling Camera celebrities coffee Comedy David Tennant Doctor Who dvd Film G4 Google Hillbilly iPhone Lost Matt Smith Movies Muppets new releases photos Review robots Science self-help Sex SmartPhone Space Stand-Up star wars tech television Twitter video games watches Web Soup win/win/fail Wired YouTube zombiesUNSOLICITED ADVICE
They Talk In Maths(?)
Does Continuity Interfere With Storytelling?
Alien Probes And You
Disconnecting
Disappointing Holiday Gift Guide: How Electric Football Made Me A Cynic
AWESOME card @CraigyFerg gave me for doing his show tonight: http://bit.ly/fergucard (show was a friggin BLAST, btw) about 4 hours ago
I am sooo happy.
There on the nerdist ( @nerdist on Twitter ) was an entire blog post devoted to the trouble with timelines in writing and just how important is it for a writer to be mindful of continuity.
I used to do Interactive Blog Stories on a pseudo diary type blog. It was actually a writer's journal in a way. I'd write about the current events in my life and the world that surrounded each day and then would write poetry and short stories and -
Anyway.
I started referring to past posts and then documenting that on the actual past post. It was interesting to study memory versus the "at the moment" posting. For me, it was like going back in time. Kind of -
Anyway again.
Hey.
(next day. I was going to come right back but something came up. :D)
So about this blog. After a while of writing and referring back to older posts it got me to thinking about going back in time. Each time I referred back to the older posts, now this was from different points in time both before and after the date in question, I could note if there was something I'd do differently or note how going back might have changed the future. Then I would give the Gentle Readers who were reading it the option of going forward or backward by making choices. It was alot of fun. Kind of like a carnival ride throug someone's imagination. The thing was it also made me mindful of the importance of the job of what we like to call The Continuity Fairy. This is the imaginary or real folks who keep up with this type of thing. The ones who have a keen eye for detail or a remarkable memory. It's important and yes it's annoying when important elements, key elements, are forgotten. It can also create havoc in the story. Those unintended consequences and illogical posts like this one from last night:
.
....
Don't read the rest just yet. I have to go to the restroom. And this blog post isn't finished
AND
This next part won't make sense without further explaination.
Baring unforeseen flood or famine, I should be back to finish within the next 15 minutes.
Anne
.
.
Now to answer the question posed on the Nerdist webpage,
Is continuity important in a long running play or television show (like Dr. Who).
To which I replied?
Absolutely not.
So much time devoted to this subject when actually the answer is clear to anyone who's watched a long running soap.
Things change.
AND?
Even the Continuity Fairies screw up from time to time.
It's a hard job being a Continuity Fairy. When you have a story line that's not just linear its also overlapping you can miss stuff. It's not like traveling back on Memory Lane is just well a memory.
Stuff happens.
You do your best to keep it all straight and then when someone points out a tiny little flaw you deny OR you make more stuff up to "patch up" the little riffle in the "space time continum " to fix it.
Easy peasy.
Hugs and kisses.
GHB
PS One should not confuse the Continuity Fairies with the Incontinent Fairies. The Continuity Fairies are the patron saints of writers. They are that loyal band of editors and fans who help writers keep on the straight and narrow of a story so that if they have a continuity accident, it can be fixed. This allows them, the writers, to keep their jobs and thus their kids in school or to make the car payments. The Incontinent Fairies are the patron saints of tiny old people and dogs. They watch after the tiny old people and dogs so that if they have and "accident" it will be out in the yard and not on the new couch.
Very important difference.
Both are very busy and have been known to become distracted by their real life and can miss things.
.
Tootles.
.
Does Continuity Interfere With Storytelling?
by Kyle Anderson on January 4, 2011
Any long running story — generally TV shows, but occasionally movie franchises — is bound to be steeped in a deep and rich continuity, stuff that has happened before affecting the current spate of stories. This is a phenomenon that’s bound to happen. Even shows that are particularly episodic, like the now-defunct Law & Order, would sometimes be forced to reference past events. They had to; the characters do not become clean slates every 49th minute.
Science Fiction series are especially mired down by continuity that their core of die-hard fans will defend to the end of time. It’s these fans who will go on message boards and complain until their fingers bleed that a new episode does something, no matter how minuscule, that disrupts the fabric of the past, or at the very least ignores something once thought sacred. But, is it sacred? Shouldn’t the most important part of storytelling be telling a good story?
As many of you will know, I watch an inordinate amount of Doctor Who, from all eras, and a show that’s been on for the better part of 50 years is bound to have a huge amount of continuity built up that the fans, some of the most fervent of the lot, accept as gospel.
In the 1972 story “Day of the Daleks,” a concept is offered up to explain why it’s a bad thing for a person (or object) to physically interact with itself should it travel in time and cross its own timeline. Should one do so, they would cause a paradox resulting in the destruction of the universe or the sudden death of puppies or something else awful. The fictional name for the concept the story’s writer gave is the now-famous “Blinovitch Limitation Effect.” For the purposes of the story at hand, it was a plot point to add an extra layer of tension as well as providing a quick explanation as to why the Doctor, or anyone for that matter, could not simply try again if he screwed something up the first time around. It’s a novel idea and, as time travel is largely speculative anyway, it seems just as plausible as anything else. It was a function of that story and for that story it worked.
The term and concept are mentioned a few more times throughout the show’s long history, but I’ll just talk about two specifically. In the 1983 story “Mawdryn Undead,” the Doctor and his companion Turlough are in 1983, while his other two companions, Nyssa and Tegan, are in 1977, both groups encountering the Brigadier. Eventually, all of them end up in the same space ship at the same time, and it becomes imperative, along with the rest of the bad stuff happening in the story, that they have to keep the two Brigadiers away from each other, lest the universe implode.
Again, in the 2005 story “Father’s Day,” the Ninth Doctor takes Rose to witness her father’s death in a car accident (what a morbid person she is), and, instead, she decides to save him, thus creating a rift in space and time for big flying dinosaur-like beasts called Reapers, which feed off of time distortions. At one point, Rose actually physically touches her infant self and causes a whole other mess of crap to happen. Like “Day of the Daleks,” the Blinovitch Limitation Effect is used as a story modifier, a plot point that propels the action.
Two recent Doctor Who stories choose to ignore the BLE, despite it being part of the show’s continuity. In the series 5 finale, “The Big Bang,” the Doctor and Rory touch sonic screwdrivers and a big spark occurs, proving to the Doctor that they are indeed the same screwdriver at different points in its timeline, yet, later, adult Amy Pond pats child Amelia Pond on the head briefly. Nothing happens. Later still, the Doctor clutches his ten-minutes-earlier self and whispers a secret, again with no real detriment. In the context of this story, this can be explained away by saying the universe was in the middle of blowing up anyway and any paradoxical behavior would have no further influence on it. Kind of like shooting a dead body; what’s one more bullet hole if the guy’s already snuffed it?
Still, in the recent Christmas special, Kazran Sardick (played by Michael Gambon) physically interacts with himself as a child, and there’s absolutely no mention of it being a bad thing. This, too, can be explained away, which I won’t do for anyone who hasn’t seen it, but my question is: does it matter? To a lot of people, it did. Fan forums and podcasts have spoken in-depth about how it spits in the face of the show to do something like that. Part of me will always notice things like that and think, “Hey, wait a minute,” but the other part of me says, “Man, that’s a really great moment in that character’s arc.” It’s things like this that cause Kyle the fan and Kyle the writer come to blows. Obviously, in the course of hundreds of hours of adventures, story points will become part of that show’s lore, but should they stand in the way of someone telling a good story NOW?
In both cases, the writer Steven Moffat (who’s always played fast and loose with continuity) is telling a very particular fable using this long-established character and realm as his lead and both are exceedingly well-told. Neither story would be nearly as effective if they steadfastly adhered to a story point dreamt up almost 40 years ago. And, let us not forget, even the classic series chose to gloss over the esteemed Limitation Effect when it suited the storytelling. In the stories “The Three Doctors,” “The Five Doctors,” and “The Two Doctors,” the Doctor’s previous and current incarnations cross paths with each other and nothing is said about it and they all occurred post-Blinovitch.
It's My Party
What happens when people stick too closely to the more arbitrary parts of a series’ backlog of stuff is that it limits what you can and cannot do and, especially in sci-fi or fantasy, the only limits should be the writer’s imagination. For a moment, let’s leave the world of Who for the murkier waters of Star Wars. If I remember correctly, and countless frustrated fist-clenchings have proven I do, the sole purpose of the prequels was to further continuity. Remember how well those turned out? It seems the only thing George Lucas did, from a purely storytelling standpoint, was to take every reference to the past made in the original trilogy and visually depict it in the prequels. Some things have plot holes that need to be tied up, but I think I was pretty good without knowing that Darth Vader used to be a whiny, petulant cry-baby who murdered kids at the behest of a fairly unconvincing mentor. It somehow diminishes the effect of the original trilogy. Darth Vader was a blank slate when he appeared in 1977 and yet audiences still got the gist that he was the bad guy. And Lucas even went a step further by changing the ORIGINAL films to be perfectly aligned with the crap he made up in the prequels. Retconning is usual a function of making the past fit the story you’re now telling, but making stuff in the future fit the stuff in the past is proactive continuity, or Proconning. What a waste of energy. It’s much less important to me that Boba Fett have the voice of Jango Fett from Episode II than it is who the character is and what he represents. I can’t decide if it’s a fan-wank or just a Lucas-wank.
And it’s not just Star Wars. I know everyone bitches about the prequels, and have done in a far more detailed and articulate way (see: Red Letter Media), so let’s take something else. The tv show LOST was a twisty, turny, confusing mush of science, mysticism, and soap-opera. In the third season, the show introduced two characters, the hated Paulo and Nikki, who were supposed to have been there on the island for as long as everybody else. But why are we only now seeing them? The writers spent such a long time trying to explain where the two of them were during all the rest of the episodes we’ve already seen that they forsook (an actual word by the way) other, more interesting storylines. In the final season, the show had so many unanswered continuity questions that they couldn’t possibly attend to all of them, and thus didn’t. In this case, the lack of continuity got in the way of enjoying the story that was being presented.
I'll Do What I Want!
Part of the fun of watching series for many years is that you can see how action leads to reaction on a grander scale. It’s like pieces of a puzzle finally being put in the right order while finding new pieces you didn’t even know were there. Some things, though, are merely window dressing to help a particular story and should not be held up as truth spoken by the Lawgiver. Steven Moffat has been quoted as saying a show about time travel can never have an official continuity, which is a clever way of saying he’s going to write whatever the fuck he wants and that’s that, which I can really respect. Nothing was shaken up to the point of being unrecognizable, nor was anything about the core belief of the character changed or misrepresented. Where’s the harm, I ask you? There comes a point where the writer just needs to tell a story the best way he or she knows how and suffer through the handful of fans who’ll complain that it goes against everything the show represents. They’re still watching and will keep watching, and, really, that’s what it’s all about.
Share and Enjoy:
19 comments
{ 19 comments… read them below or add one }
yogahz January 4, 2011 at 8:59 am
Thanks for this article Kyle.
I don’t mind when the writer changes the rules – in that I agree with Moffat, but it always takes me out of the story (Amy patting Amelia) until I’m drawn back in by the same story. It’s usually a moment that merits breaking the rules.
Themonk January 4, 2011 at 9:22 am
As a life-long fan of sci-fi I understand the frustration of continuity conflicts. I’ve witnessed them countless times, and have finally come to the conclusion that they are an inherent part of the beauty of the genre. Continuity conflicts will always be present in stories that cover long periods of time…period…just as no one is ever truly dead or destroyed in sci-fi because some writer will invariably invent some way to resurrect them if or when needed in later story lines.
Lisa G January 4, 2011 at 9:32 am
Rule #1:
“Never let the facts get in the way of telling a great story.”
As a writer as well as a geeky fangirl of every franchise you mentioned, neither part of my brain is bothered when something current appears to contradict something prior. Hell, even Shakespeare screwed with history and geography, knowing they weren’t as important to a story as character and relationships.
There will always be literal, linear people who get their undies in a bunch at the tiniest bit of untidiness, in stories or in life. The rest of us like to surf the chaos and enjoy the fun. As long as a story justifies itself within itself, it can tweak any history or cannon as much as it wants. I’ll suspend my disbelief and keep munching my popcorn.
Del Coro January 4, 2011 at 10:23 am
If Amy patting her younger self on the head “takes you out of the story,” you’re doing it wrong.
Joe January 4, 2011 at 10:30 am
I was just having a discussion on another site about how Dungeon Masters in D&D live in the worlds they create and players just visit them.
It is sort of the opposite with shows. The writers visit the shows for the episodes they write and the viewers live in and obsess over them.
The end result being that the visitors do not care about continuity or the long term story only about what is happening when they visit.
Chris W. January 4, 2011 at 11:00 am
I agree with all you wrote.
That said, there does rest on the writer a modicum of responsibility to the audience to regard continuity. The writer is hoping that the audience will invest time in a piece of work. Part of that investment is to take what has happened as either important or just part of the story. To then take that investment and say, “oh nevermind audience, forget what you saw, here’s something else…the real story I want to tell” is forsaking that responsibility.
Why would an audience invest time in a serialized show if the writer doesn’t feel beholden to the universe of their story? I wouldn’t waste my time if I knew that the next season the writer was just going to ignore all the things from the previous season.
yogahz January 4, 2011 at 11:07 am
@ Del Coro
All I meant was that in that gesture I thought of the “Blinovitch Limitation Effect” even though it had no role. I easily and quickly moved on.
So what’s the right way?
Stacy January 4, 2011 at 11:21 am
As far as the paradox in the Big Bang story, I assumed it didn’t create a paradox because that was how the original events played out. Amy makes a comment about remembering being there when she was a child. And the paradox didn’t happen when the Doctor whispered something to himself, because that’s what originally happened. I can’t explain the sonic screw driver thing though.
After watching the Three Doctor’s, the paradox thing did cross my mind, but I filled it in with the story like above… maybe the Doctor’s did all this in their own time lines, and off camera each of the older Doctor’s were saying “Ah, yeah… I remember this – well, let’s get on with it.” And the Doctor just had amnesia about his recorder each time…
I enjoyed Steven Moffat’s writing on Coupling and on the other Doctor Who stories he’s done in the past. I probably get more excited seeing Moffat’s name fly across the screen than seeing Davies’.
I’m with Lisa on this one – and I hope she will kindly pass the popcorn
Mammaklehm January 4, 2011 at 12:27 pm
I think as long as a writer is mostly respectful of the past small mis-steps are fine. Better not to complain too much and make a beloved writer want to quit the series!
Plus, a lot of pointing out errors is more the fans proving they know the series than anything else.
Doc January 4, 2011 at 3:18 pm
There’s a certain amount of nerd-foam that appears whenever these sorts of discussions, eh, erupt. I’d like to pretend I don’t care, but I don’t. Which is to say, I do, but only to the degree when the entire thing becomes a distraction. It’s interesting that the Amy/Amelia point was raised. I thought, “Whoa,” when I saw that, but it didn’t raise any alarms. Moffat is very good at retrofitting tiny points into larger storyline arcs, where what seems to be incidental kicks off sequence of events that ends up with… well… who knows? There may indeed be a problem that arises from that contact… but it hasn’t materialized yet. Since we’ve never actually experienced “the end of everything”, nobody knows what it looks like.
Dalek January 4, 2011 at 5:14 pm
Continuity is what makes a story. Things happen and then things happen based on those events. Consequences are what make a long story interesting. What interferes with storytelling is bad storytelling.
A good example is STTNG: Forces of Nature. Someone thought it would be cool to do an episode where warp drive was discovered to have harmful effects on space. They put a limit on it at the end of the story and then have to mention permission to exceed it in a few episodes down the line. Then they just stop mentioning it all together. Any time someone asks, they mumble something about how “it must have been solved off camera”
It’s not a very good story and it creates a lot of unnecessary work later on down the line so that they can ignore the consequences of the story. Then they just get rid of the consequences entirely. Maybe it just shouldn’t have been written at all.
PapaFrita January 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm
Continuity is a powerful tool when you’ve got a whole story planned out. That way little things from earlier in the series can become big deals later and feel like good storytelling. It works well for comedic effect as well (Arrested Development, The Venture Bros). On a show like Dr. Who, though, trying to work continuity across decades and different writers/directors/producers is impossible. Moffit is right to do whatever he likes.
Charles January 4, 2011 at 5:46 pm
Large long-running universes get complex and missing some bit of continuity can be expected and mostly ignored. But, as a fan, what gets to me is that much of it is just plain stupid. The Star Trek franchise was loaded with them, with Brannon Braga often making fun of the fans for their notices of continuity problems. Some would say that this arrogance ran the franchise into the ground. One problem in STTNG has already been pointed out. In another episode they beamed through shields, even though it’s always been canon that you can’t beam through shields. Why did they do that? I think they just didn’t care. It would have take a tiny bit of extra thought to make the same story just as good and exciting without this stupid mistake and they would not have the wrath of fans like myself to deal with. Instead, they were lazy.
Art is always straining against boundaries. Often it is those boundaries that make art great. Pushing the boundaries is fine, but ignoring them is dumb. Would you be okay if Dr. Who suddenly turned out to be a Dalek in disguise for one episode because some writer wrote a great “Dr. Who is really a Dalek” episode? (“It’s a twist,” as they say on Robot Chicken). Too many writers like to claim they are better than continuity, but are really just too lazy to come up with a story just as good, but without the disruptive elements that make anyone who knows the universe cringe.
Please consider also, even in your editorial, your engagement in a story was temporarily interrupted as you thought of how a basic idea has been disregarded. Interestingly, the part of you that considered this okay is the part (the writer) that is not in the vast majority of the viewing public. Is this distraction a good idea?
Gabriel January 4, 2011 at 7:30 pm
I think the most convoluted continuity problems I have seen were in DC comics. I remember the Crisis on Infinite Earths series from the 80′s when I was a kid. They tried to clean up all the continuity problems so the fanboys would quit their bitching. In the end this is all made up. The story you are telling is more important that some other story. If you can reference in a way that is good for your story great. If not don’t worry about it.
Zil January 4, 2011 at 9:32 pm
I hafta say I agree with Stacy–it might be because things are supposed to happen this way in certain instances.
Galadriel January 4, 2011 at 11:32 pm
Great piece, Kyle! I suspect you’ve been hanging out at DoctorWhoTV, reading our discussions… or perhaps participating in them? Anyway, I absolutely agree with Chris W. and Charles and have more to add:
There’s a fine line to walk here. Writers with high positions and power–just like powerful people in government and business–believe they can do whatever they want, and they often get away with it. The results usually range from disappointing to disastrous. The Star Wars prequels are good examples: moneymakers without great storytelling. I’m keeping my hopes up re: Steven Moffat, but he’s starting to trend toward Lucas-ness. We writers trying to break in are the ones forced to attend to every detail in our work, which means our writing often has much better continuity than the stuff from those guys already sittin’ pretty. We must have ultimate respect for our audience/readers; they are the ones who make or break us, whether they are agents, editors, fans, producers, etc.
So my point (and I do have one!) is that blatantly thumbing your nose at established rules of beloved stories–and at their fans–just because you can is bad storytelling in itself. If a writer thinks his story must bend the rules to be its best, then he should do it in a respectful, briefly explanatory way, as we aspiring writers must do to gain our place in the world. (Of course, then our bosses get to mess up all that work to make it “marketable”… but then it’s not the writer’s fault!)
Sometimes all it takes to keep (most) fans happy is a line like, “We don’t talk about that” (Worf?) when the issue of Klingons looking different through the years came up in ST:DS9. Ignoring the issue would have been lazy and ridiculous; attending to it was entertaining… while leaving open fan speculation on genetic engineering, etc.
So yes, bend the rules if your story demands it… but do it with grace and care and respect, and you’ll retain the respect of your audience.
Eric January 6, 2011 at 1:26 pm
But but but… what about those two Cybermen wandering the TARDIS???!?!
PapaFrita January 7, 2011 at 2:38 pm
Can you really base the continuity of Dr. Who based on the idea that it’s all one continuous story? It’d be different if there was an intended ending to the grand story, but it’s not that kind of show. The character of the Doctor continues, but as he changes his face and personality, so does the tone and style of each season. It’s more like a reboot, really, than the next chapter in a continuing series. Moffat is writing about his own Doctor in a similar way that Christopher Nolan is writing about his own Batman.
Daniel January 18, 2011 at 12:58 pm
I didn’t think there was any ridiculous turn of Dr Who that could get to me since it’s such a ball of nonsense anyway, and I have great affection for it, flying sharks and all. So I was surprised when the travel in your own timeline aspect really bothered me. Two big reasons: first, an entire, memorable episode of the new series devoted to why this can never happen (giant bat monsters come and eat you), and second, and this is obvious, to avoid the Bill & Ted problem: any problem could just be solved via time travel – and you have unlimited chances to get things right. So to me this limitation is an essential part of how the show works, as much as the Doctor not shooting people. The christmas carol time travelling was moving but just not right for Dr Who. I am definitely enjoying Steven Moffatt’s version overall, but I regard this as a major mistake and I hope it never happens again. (somehow Blink gets by with me…)
Leave a Comment
Name *
E-mail *
Website
Previous post: Life With The Lions
Next post: Adventures At CES, Prologue: We Were Somewhere Around Barstow….
POPULAR POSTS
Nerdist Podcast #54 - KEVIN SMITH
Rugrats Dalek Easter Egg
Tasmania=Pubes
Not Since Fred 'Twinkletoes' Flintstone....
SEARCH
CATEGORIES
Animals
Art
Books
Charity
Coffee
Comedy
Comics
Contests
DIY/HowTo
Environment
Film
Food
Found
G4
Games
General Nerdism
Health
HnP
Muppets
Music
News
Pics
Podcast
Products
Review
Science
Sex
Shirts
Space
Sports
Stand-Up
Television
Travel
Uncategorized
Unsolicited Advice
Video
Wallpaper
Watches
Web/Tech
Wired
SURF BY TAG
Apple AT&T Attack of the Show awesome back to the future book review Books Bowling Camera celebrities coffee Comedy David Tennant Doctor Who dvd Film G4 Google Hillbilly iPhone Lost Matt Smith Movies Muppets new releases photos Review robots Science self-help Sex SmartPhone Space Stand-Up star wars tech television Twitter video games watches Web Soup win/win/fail Wired YouTube zombiesUNSOLICITED ADVICE
They Talk In Maths(?)
Does Continuity Interfere With Storytelling?
Alien Probes And You
Disconnecting
Disappointing Holiday Gift Guide: How Electric Football Made Me A Cynic
AWESOME card @CraigyFerg gave me for doing his show tonight: http://bit.ly/fergucard (show was a friggin BLAST, btw) about 4 hours ago
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
State of the Union address
.
President Obama's State of the Union speech, 8PM Central Standard Time, on all the major networks.
Colorful political analysis afterwards.
(Insert Youtube of president's speech here tomorrow.)
HURRAY the president's State of the Union speech is AFTER Glee!
I am soooo happy.
I always watch.
We watched to see if Rep Nancy Pelosi could keep her pompoms down long enough for us to hear the Prez and now we're watching to see if Rep Boehner starts crying when President Obama reminds him that he, Obama, is still the president.
LOL
Jeff Foxworthy, the "you might be a Redneck" guy, does a comedy sketch about presidential speeches being on television. The complaint he had as a kid was that the president was on every tv channel.
Apparently it conflicted with watching "Flipper".
Tonight I'm trying to be a grown up. I know that these speeches are important to watch but another part of me says, "Ah heck. Am I going to miss Glee?"
LOL.
This stuff is important. Someone went to all the trouble to write and produce these speeches. It's important to watch.
Grow up.
Watch the speech.
It's important.
(You know you'll have to contribute your opinion about this speech tomorrow at work. If you have a job. If you don't. You are really gonna' want to watch this speech. So that you can vote.)
Please Note
If you don't want to watch the speech you can watch (according to online TVGuide-)
Hellcats on the CW
FourWeddings and a Funeral (movie) on TVGN (the TV Guide Network)
and
MeanGirls on (huh?) ABCFamily ? You know, ABC, that doesn't sound very family like.)
There's other stuff but you'll have to go find out yourself.
Don't forget to vote!
.
President Obama's State of the Union speech, 8PM Central Standard Time, on all the major networks.
Colorful political analysis afterwards.
(Insert Youtube of president's speech here tomorrow.)
HURRAY the president's State of the Union speech is AFTER Glee!
I am soooo happy.
I always watch.
We watched to see if Rep Nancy Pelosi could keep her pompoms down long enough for us to hear the Prez and now we're watching to see if Rep Boehner starts crying when President Obama reminds him that he, Obama, is still the president.
LOL
Jeff Foxworthy, the "you might be a Redneck" guy, does a comedy sketch about presidential speeches being on television. The complaint he had as a kid was that the president was on every tv channel.
Apparently it conflicted with watching "Flipper".
Tonight I'm trying to be a grown up. I know that these speeches are important to watch but another part of me says, "Ah heck. Am I going to miss Glee?"
LOL.
This stuff is important. Someone went to all the trouble to write and produce these speeches. It's important to watch.
Grow up.
Watch the speech.
It's important.
(You know you'll have to contribute your opinion about this speech tomorrow at work. If you have a job. If you don't. You are really gonna' want to watch this speech. So that you can vote.)
Please Note
If you don't want to watch the speech you can watch (according to online TVGuide-)
Hellcats on the CW
FourWeddings and a Funeral (movie) on TVGN (the TV Guide Network)
and
MeanGirls on (huh?) ABCFamily ? You know, ABC, that doesn't sound very family like.)
There's other stuff but you'll have to go find out yourself.
Don't forget to vote!
.
Well with Regis, Oprah, Keith, and King leaving....
.
Let's face it.
The world of television is changing. At least on late night or interview television.
.
Let's face it.
The world of television is changing. At least on late night or interview television.
I blame it on Jon Stewart and The Daily Show.
When Mr. Steward chastised the reporters during a Democratic National Convention interview by saying that he was a comedian and not a reporter, it was clear that the line between reality and parody of late night chat show had been crossed in mainstream television. No longer were these shows a way to report on the pop culture story, they were the pop culture story. Think about how often you hear about what the hosts on these shows are doing or saying versus what their guest did on their show?
It's why Jon Stewart was being interviewed instead of a reporter or candidate. He was the news. A representative of a the way politics, news and television was changing. Access by computer and cellphone, Youtube and iTunes just made the change easier.
So what's next?
The LLS with Craig Ferguson.
I'm not sure if there's another talk show that blurrs the line between interview and entertainment. The host, Craig Ferguson (ie @Craigyferg on Twitter),n the LLS, has reached through the camera and grabbed his audiences attention. Like a Internet "friend" with a sharp wit, he lampoons culture and even the talk show format itself. It's no longer a monologue he's doing, it's a dialog. The audience isn't just watching folks talk, nope, thanks to Tweets and emails, they're part of the conversation.
And like really good reality tv farce?
We're all in on the joke.
Meta humor at it's finest.
Love ya,
@GoatHerderBoy
.
Whoo hooo! It's Oscar nom time!
.
I used to love this time of year.
Actually, when it came to movies, I loved all the year. There's something lovely about going into a theater, large multiplex or small art house, and waiting with pop corn in hand for the house lights to dim. There on that huge screen time stopped and magic hopefully happened.
Not anymore.
While there are still really good movies being made, I just can't justify spending the 12 to 15 dollars a ticket to see one. Sure I saw Avitar in 3D. Yes, there will be exceptions. After seeing Inception on DVD, I'm sorry that I didn't see that movie on the big screen. It's just that I can see live professionally done theater for not much more. It supports the arts locally and well the theater productions here won't be coming out on NetFlex.
As for True Grit?
I have this feeling that Jeff Bridges will win the Oscar for the new True Grit.
From what I've heard, Mr. Bridges' performance isn't a copy of John Wayne's. While it's based on the same book, Mr. Bridges' performance stands on it's own as does Mr. Wayne's. I expect that there will be all kinds of warm and fuzzy feellings about the parallels between the two men, their performances, and there Oscars.
When True Grit comes out on DVD, I'll be able to watch the Jeff Bridges' version of the movie. Then I'll rent the John Wayne version. Comparing the two performances vs the book character might be fun.
Note:
The year that John Wayne won his Oscar for playing the lead in True Grit his competition was fierce:
Peter OToole Goodbye Mr. Chips
Dustin Hoffman Midnight Cowboy
John Voight Midnight Cowboy
Richard Burton Ann of the Thousand Days
vs
John Wayne TrueGrit
You can see it here. He gave a great speech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qQhODwivLU&feature=related
LOL Youtube, gotta love it.
.
I used to love this time of year.
Actually, when it came to movies, I loved all the year. There's something lovely about going into a theater, large multiplex or small art house, and waiting with pop corn in hand for the house lights to dim. There on that huge screen time stopped and magic hopefully happened.
Not anymore.
While there are still really good movies being made, I just can't justify spending the 12 to 15 dollars a ticket to see one. Sure I saw Avitar in 3D. Yes, there will be exceptions. After seeing Inception on DVD, I'm sorry that I didn't see that movie on the big screen. It's just that I can see live professionally done theater for not much more. It supports the arts locally and well the theater productions here won't be coming out on NetFlex.
As for True Grit?
I have this feeling that Jeff Bridges will win the Oscar for the new True Grit.
From what I've heard, Mr. Bridges' performance isn't a copy of John Wayne's. While it's based on the same book, Mr. Bridges' performance stands on it's own as does Mr. Wayne's. I expect that there will be all kinds of warm and fuzzy feellings about the parallels between the two men, their performances, and there Oscars.
When True Grit comes out on DVD, I'll be able to watch the Jeff Bridges' version of the movie. Then I'll rent the John Wayne version. Comparing the two performances vs the book character might be fun.
Note:
The year that John Wayne won his Oscar for playing the lead in True Grit his competition was fierce:
Peter OToole Goodbye Mr. Chips
Dustin Hoffman Midnight Cowboy
John Voight Midnight Cowboy
Richard Burton Ann of the Thousand Days
vs
John Wayne TrueGrit
You can see it here. He gave a great speech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qQhODwivLU&feature=related
LOL Youtube, gotta love it.
.
Monday, January 24, 2011
From waaay back
.
Was rummaging through the old 12dogs archives looking for a poem when I found something that I'd written back in 2008. Thought I might bring it out into the light of day and maybe buff it up a bit.
Soft
Work in Progress
I feel as if I’m in the dark with my eyes wide open but I can not see
It’s not a frightening dark
It’s a soft, liquid, slightly out of focus dark
As I move through your mind
Everything is soft
Like down pillows and down comforters
Soft
Like feathers falling from the sky
Snow flakes
Soft
Like a whisper of a wisp
When I stumble and I fall?
I fall into clouds
Soft
Wisps of clouds like dust swirl up around me as I fall into the emotion
That’s how this afternoon felt
Words like
“meloncholy”
“velvet”
“wisp”
and
“whisper”
Sad…because a friend was leaving
A smile — because another friend had stayed
The day soft
I wrote the sorrow away from my heart
The emotions coraled into a box of words
Put back into Pandora’s Box
Only this time Hope
Outside the box
Free
Falling up
As I move through the soft in slow motion
Soft word on the lips
My mind’s eye comforted
Writing in slow motion
My heart sings
Please don’t be angry with me
All unintentional
I have to write
You
Soft
Author Ann
21 October,2008 all rights reserved by the author
Yep, yep. I remember the feeling. Now, when I read it, I'm thinking it's too long. Werdy. The idea was to convey my impression of a person.
Was rummaging through the old 12dogs archives looking for a poem when I found something that I'd written back in 2008. Thought I might bring it out into the light of day and maybe buff it up a bit.
Soft
Work in Progress
I feel as if I’m in the dark with my eyes wide open but I can not see
It’s not a frightening dark
It’s a soft, liquid, slightly out of focus dark
As I move through your mind
Everything is soft
Like down pillows and down comforters
Soft
Like feathers falling from the sky
Snow flakes
Soft
Like a whisper of a wisp
When I stumble and I fall?
I fall into clouds
Soft
Wisps of clouds like dust swirl up around me as I fall into the emotion
That’s how this afternoon felt
Words like
“meloncholy”
“velvet”
“wisp”
and
“whisper”
Sad…because a friend was leaving
A smile — because another friend had stayed
The day soft
I wrote the sorrow away from my heart
The emotions coraled into a box of words
Put back into Pandora’s Box
Only this time Hope
Outside the box
Free
Falling up
As I move through the soft in slow motion
Soft word on the lips
My mind’s eye comforted
Writing in slow motion
My heart sings
Please don’t be angry with me
All unintentional
I have to write
You
Soft
Author Ann
21 October,2008 all rights reserved by the author
Yep, yep. I remember the feeling. Now, when I read it, I'm thinking it's too long. Werdy. The idea was to convey my impression of a person.
Might break it into smaller pieces. Reconstitute into a group of poems instead of just one.
"Standing" here on it's own, this piece needs to be reworked.
.
.
"Be happy for this moment. For this moment is your life."
.
Quote of unknown (at least to me) origin and age.
.
I'm not sure if anyone will ever figure this out. I learned how to do it on ebay blogs. It's really simple. Thinking that I might just do a series of quotes. Only the quote will be visible but the comentary will not.
Wonder if anyone will figure it out.
LOL,
Who loves ya' baby?
AuthorAnn
smooch.
.
.
.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
So that I don't forget...
.
http://www.somethingwonderful.com/
The adventures of Traveling Uncle Nate. :D
(gosh, I'm stuffed.)
.
http://www.somethingwonderful.com/
The adventures of Traveling Uncle Nate. :D
(gosh, I'm stuffed.)
.
YYYYeeeeHaaaa.
...
WB's back.
(and he brought Paula Deen coffee cake. Yummy.)
Lots to do, Gentle Reader.
We finally bought the washing machine and I've got to get the path from the front door to the laundry closet sorted. Should wash clothes before it comes so that it doesn't get discouraged and leave.
Then there's the pups...
I'm hearing that it might be pretty tomorrow.
I hope so.
Hugs,
WriterAnn
PS I'm submiting one of my poems to a magazine. Haven't decided if it should come with an essay. Have until March so there's time.
Hmm I know I shouldn't but there's pizza too.
And I'm really hungry.
Tah.
.
.
WB's back.
(and he brought Paula Deen coffee cake. Yummy.)
Lots to do, Gentle Reader.
We finally bought the washing machine and I've got to get the path from the front door to the laundry closet sorted. Should wash clothes before it comes so that it doesn't get discouraged and leave.
Then there's the pups...
I'm hearing that it might be pretty tomorrow.
I hope so.
Hugs,
WriterAnn
PS I'm submiting one of my poems to a magazine. Haven't decided if it should come with an essay. Have until March so there's time.
Hmm I know I shouldn't but there's pizza too.
And I'm really hungry.
Tah.
.
.
"Who hoo. I'm just a love machine...."
.
Dear Newt,
I'm not sure where you are anymore. The last I heard, you'd parted ways with the person you'd finally trusted your heart to. I'm sorry that I couldn't give you the advice that you needed. In my heart of hearts, I'm hoping that Fate and God will see to it that you find me here.
This post is for you.
Hugs from all of us,
Writing Buddy.
For Newt.
You know Newt, sometimes you just have to suck it up like a Hoover.
Otherwise, you'll lose that girl.
(Oh boy, am I in trouble.)
A list of consideration for those people who'd like to make it to anniversary 2.
Dating experts outline seven match areas to consider:
1. Physical appearance
While physical appearance and attraction draw two people together at first, these aspects will affect the rest of their lives. If working out and staying fit is important to you, will it bum you out if your mate doesn’t share your quest for rock-hard abs?
2. Emotional maturity
Is this person emotionally mature and centered or still lugging around some trunk-sized baggage? How does your sweetheart relate to family and friends? Is he or she emotionally supportive or have control issues? Is your mate aware of his or her own issues and interested in addressing them?
3. Lifestyle choices
This includes career and social lives, common interests, leisure time activities and energy levels. Would she rather join the bowling league or the metropolitan symphony? Does he have lots of energy for activities with friends while she’d rather rest and chill out at home?
4. Financial compatibility
This is a hot bed for most couples. It includes income levels, savings goals and views on handling money. How do you each want to spend, save and invest? Is one person a spender while the other saves? Is one person financially responsible while the other plays catch-up with child support and bills?
5. Value structure
This area is often overlooked but has a tremendous impact on your life. It includes the big values: honesty, integrity, loyalty, views on family and children, religion and spirituality, life goals and the treatment and care for others. Does your mate follow through on promises made? Would you say this person is trustworthy? Will you always be there for each other in a pinch?
6. Marriage and intimacy
Everyone does not share the same idea of marriage. The big questions to address are: What do you and your mate expect from marriage? Is he or she looking for a soul mate? Do you both want close intimacy beyond the physical aspect, including with your friendships and in private communications with each other?
7. Intelligence
Having similar education levels increases your chances of sharing matching school and social experiences, intellectual interests and career goals. What topics do you and your honey like to talk about? Conversation limited to sports or shopping may get boring to someone who likes to ponder philosophy and bluster about business.
While you don’t have to match exactly in each area, look at the big picture and make sure you match closely enough in the important areas of your life to up your chances of finding a love that will go the distance.
Dee Anne Merriman is a freelance writer who often covers relationship issues.
Now I read these 7 characteristics and thought, "How in heck have I managed to actually make it to anniversary 26." I'm not sure that either of us would pass this test.
Then I smacked my forehead with my hand and thought,
"Ah ha. They left out the most important rule."
Rule number 8.
If your intention is to have a marriage that lasts a long time?
You have to recognize that you will both pizz each other off. You will both be wrong at sometime or the other. You will both change. Sometimes slowly. Sometimes in a second. Crap happens and sometime you just have to suck it up and say, "Yes, dear. You are right. I was wrong."
Even if you might think in your heart of hearts that this isn't exactly correct.
Kindness (and the realization that if you don't you'll lose this person) will get the words "I'm sorry. I was wrong." out of your mouth before you blow it.
Honesty is good but affection and sympathy are better.
And laughter. It's what gets you through child rearing and midlife and menopause and "boner" pills and ...
You get the idea.
If I could describe it? It would be hugging that person in the middle of an unexpected storm. They aren't the enemy and if you've been with them long enough you'll know that and stay.
And Fate? If you'd see to it that Pup reads this too?
I'd really appreaciate it.
WriterAnn
.
Dear Newt,
I'm not sure where you are anymore. The last I heard, you'd parted ways with the person you'd finally trusted your heart to. I'm sorry that I couldn't give you the advice that you needed. In my heart of hearts, I'm hoping that Fate and God will see to it that you find me here.
This post is for you.
Hugs from all of us,
Writing Buddy.
For Newt.
You know Newt, sometimes you just have to suck it up like a Hoover.
Otherwise, you'll lose that girl.
(Oh boy, am I in trouble.)
A list of consideration for those people who'd like to make it to anniversary 2.
Dating experts outline seven match areas to consider:
1. Physical appearance
While physical appearance and attraction draw two people together at first, these aspects will affect the rest of their lives. If working out and staying fit is important to you, will it bum you out if your mate doesn’t share your quest for rock-hard abs?
2. Emotional maturity
Is this person emotionally mature and centered or still lugging around some trunk-sized baggage? How does your sweetheart relate to family and friends? Is he or she emotionally supportive or have control issues? Is your mate aware of his or her own issues and interested in addressing them?
3. Lifestyle choices
This includes career and social lives, common interests, leisure time activities and energy levels. Would she rather join the bowling league or the metropolitan symphony? Does he have lots of energy for activities with friends while she’d rather rest and chill out at home?
4. Financial compatibility
This is a hot bed for most couples. It includes income levels, savings goals and views on handling money. How do you each want to spend, save and invest? Is one person a spender while the other saves? Is one person financially responsible while the other plays catch-up with child support and bills?
5. Value structure
This area is often overlooked but has a tremendous impact on your life. It includes the big values: honesty, integrity, loyalty, views on family and children, religion and spirituality, life goals and the treatment and care for others. Does your mate follow through on promises made? Would you say this person is trustworthy? Will you always be there for each other in a pinch?
6. Marriage and intimacy
Everyone does not share the same idea of marriage. The big questions to address are: What do you and your mate expect from marriage? Is he or she looking for a soul mate? Do you both want close intimacy beyond the physical aspect, including with your friendships and in private communications with each other?
7. Intelligence
Having similar education levels increases your chances of sharing matching school and social experiences, intellectual interests and career goals. What topics do you and your honey like to talk about? Conversation limited to sports or shopping may get boring to someone who likes to ponder philosophy and bluster about business.
While you don’t have to match exactly in each area, look at the big picture and make sure you match closely enough in the important areas of your life to up your chances of finding a love that will go the distance.
Dee Anne Merriman is a freelance writer who often covers relationship issues.
Now I read these 7 characteristics and thought, "How in heck have I managed to actually make it to anniversary 26." I'm not sure that either of us would pass this test.
Then I smacked my forehead with my hand and thought,
"Ah ha. They left out the most important rule."
Rule number 8.
If your intention is to have a marriage that lasts a long time?
You have to recognize that you will both pizz each other off. You will both be wrong at sometime or the other. You will both change. Sometimes slowly. Sometimes in a second. Crap happens and sometime you just have to suck it up and say, "Yes, dear. You are right. I was wrong."
Even if you might think in your heart of hearts that this isn't exactly correct.
Because frankly both parties more than likely will be wrong.
Alot.
Kindness (and the realization that if you don't you'll lose this person) will get the words "I'm sorry. I was wrong." out of your mouth before you blow it.
Honesty is good but affection and sympathy are better.
And laughter. It's what gets you through child rearing and midlife and menopause and "boner" pills and ...
You get the idea.
If I could describe it? It would be hugging that person in the middle of an unexpected storm. They aren't the enemy and if you've been with them long enough you'll know that and stay.
And Fate? If you'd see to it that Pup reads this too?
I'd really appreaciate it.
WriterAnn
.
Hello world...
.
She's okay.
She's gonna be okay.
It will take a bit but she's okay. I could hear the relief in WB's voice. All week there's been this dread but now he's seen her. She's out of the hospital and at home. Lot's of visitors. People to look out for her. Make sure she's okay.
I'm glad.
There'll be a time when she passes on. If I'm still here, it will be such a sad day because WB will be so lost.
But not this day.
"...
I see a light,
a little grace,
a little faith unfurls.
Well hello, World
..." *
the song Hello World sung by Lady Antebellum
She's okay.
She's gonna be okay.
It will take a bit but she's okay. I could hear the relief in WB's voice. All week there's been this dread but now he's seen her. She's out of the hospital and at home. Lot's of visitors. People to look out for her. Make sure she's okay.
I'm glad.
There'll be a time when she passes on. If I'm still here, it will be such a sad day because WB will be so lost.
But not this day.
"...
I see a light,
a little grace,
a little faith unfurls.
Well hello, World
..." *
the song Hello World sung by Lady Antebellum
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
