Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Star Wars: The Acolyte [Spoilers]
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Omak Darkleaf" data-source="post: 9388278" data-attributes="member: 7045897"><p>It's true that "show don't tell" has been a fiction writing maxim "for decades," but—ironically—you're arguing for its opposite. Indeed, the show does <em>show</em> that cortosis exists: we see The Stranger use it to parry and disrupt the lightsabers of the jedi, and their surprise is clear by the acting. Your actual complaint appears to be that we're not <em>told</em> what cortosis is: you want it to be named and described by the characters. In my estimation, it would be poor storytelling to do so.</p><p></p><p>You're entitled to your preference, of course, but I don't think that it's an error of craft that the show is showing rather than telling. It's more immersive to witness the shock of the jedi and to see their reaction. Their not knowing that it is cortosis and our not knowing that it is cortosis heightens the tension and creates a mystery and an obstacle. To better fight The Stranger, the jedi now need to investigate the phenomena to learn about it (for their sake and ours) and how to counter it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Good. With two degrees in creative writing, surely you would concede that many effective narratives withhold information from the reader that the protagonists themselves are not privileged to. Even if it's not your aesthetic preference, this is something that most narratives do, and not all of them are considered to be poorly executed.</p><p></p><p>Consider Hemingway. <em>The Sun Also Rises</em> and "Hills Like White Elephants" are two of his best examples of his "iceberg theory" in which the only a small fraction of the story is visible above the waterline and the bulk of it lies beneath the waves, where it needs to be inferred. Some people don't enjoy Hemingway's aesthetic, but that's a subjective appraisal. The contemporary critical consensus is that Hemingway was, when he was writing his best prose, a master craftsman.</p><p></p><p></p><p>We have no reason to believe that these jedi know what cortosis is and every reason to believe that they do not from their reaction to its effect on their sabers. But, if they <em>did</em> know, they would have no reason to explain what cortosis is to each other—only to us, in which case the show would be using exposition (a form of telling) rather than <em>showing</em> us an explanation such as Sol investigating the mystery and learning its answers in the jedi archives. It's good he doesn't know everything, isn't it? We don't want our jedi to look like know-it-all Mary Sues, do we? Moreover, breaking into the fight scene with a line of exposition would slow the pace of the narrative. There have been plenty of instances in which your fellow critics have complained about what they already perceive to be a slow pace. Let's not bog down the narrative for their sake.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I personally don't mind "intertextuality," which is as old as extant narrative itself. Homer doesn't both to explain everything needed to fully contextualize his stories. The audience is expected to bring knowledge from other epics to <em>The Iliad</em> to fully understand it. This approach to narrative has been prevalent in the Star Wars universe since at least the prequels. To expect Star Wars to suddenly abandon Easter Eggs is unrealistic—but at least I think we can all agree that there are fewer of them in this show than in most.</p><p></p><p>And, all that said, you're making one assumption that some of don't. You take it as a given that we're <em>not</em> going to learn what the deal with cortosis is. I would be highly surprised (and bothered, yes) if we don't eventually learn about it. These episodes aren't episodic; this is a serialized narrative, and we need to watch them all for the complete story and a complete context to view the entire story in.</p><p></p><p>Reading through this thread, I'm left with one major supposition. There critics of this show are not watching it in good faith, whereas I am. Thus far, I trust the director and the writers to take me to a satisfactory conclusion. I've yet to see what I consider to be major errors of craft in the narrative and I'm willing to give this show the benefit of the doubt. It's obvious that some other viewers feel the opposite way, and, if it's their thing to hate watch Star Wars shows, that's cool with me. It's not mine, though, and that should be cool too.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Omak Darkleaf, post: 9388278, member: 7045897"] It's true that "show don't tell" has been a fiction writing maxim "for decades," but—ironically—you're arguing for its opposite. Indeed, the show does [I]show[/I] that cortosis exists: we see The Stranger use it to parry and disrupt the lightsabers of the jedi, and their surprise is clear by the acting. Your actual complaint appears to be that we're not [I]told[/I] what cortosis is: you want it to be named and described by the characters. In my estimation, it would be poor storytelling to do so. You're entitled to your preference, of course, but I don't think that it's an error of craft that the show is showing rather than telling. It's more immersive to witness the shock of the jedi and to see their reaction. Their not knowing that it is cortosis and our not knowing that it is cortosis heightens the tension and creates a mystery and an obstacle. To better fight The Stranger, the jedi now need to investigate the phenomena to learn about it (for their sake and ours) and how to counter it. Good. With two degrees in creative writing, surely you would concede that many effective narratives withhold information from the reader that the protagonists themselves are not privileged to. Even if it's not your aesthetic preference, this is something that most narratives do, and not all of them are considered to be poorly executed. Consider Hemingway. [I]The Sun Also Rises[/I] and "Hills Like White Elephants" are two of his best examples of his "iceberg theory" in which the only a small fraction of the story is visible above the waterline and the bulk of it lies beneath the waves, where it needs to be inferred. Some people don't enjoy Hemingway's aesthetic, but that's a subjective appraisal. The contemporary critical consensus is that Hemingway was, when he was writing his best prose, a master craftsman. We have no reason to believe that these jedi know what cortosis is and every reason to believe that they do not from their reaction to its effect on their sabers. But, if they [I]did[/I] know, they would have no reason to explain what cortosis is to each other—only to us, in which case the show would be using exposition (a form of telling) rather than [I]showing[/I] us an explanation such as Sol investigating the mystery and learning its answers in the jedi archives. It's good he doesn't know everything, isn't it? We don't want our jedi to look like know-it-all Mary Sues, do we? Moreover, breaking into the fight scene with a line of exposition would slow the pace of the narrative. There have been plenty of instances in which your fellow critics have complained about what they already perceive to be a slow pace. Let's not bog down the narrative for their sake. I personally don't mind "intertextuality," which is as old as extant narrative itself. Homer doesn't both to explain everything needed to fully contextualize his stories. The audience is expected to bring knowledge from other epics to [I]The Iliad[/I] to fully understand it. This approach to narrative has been prevalent in the Star Wars universe since at least the prequels. To expect Star Wars to suddenly abandon Easter Eggs is unrealistic—but at least I think we can all agree that there are fewer of them in this show than in most. And, all that said, you're making one assumption that some of don't. You take it as a given that we're [I]not[/I] going to learn what the deal with cortosis is. I would be highly surprised (and bothered, yes) if we don't eventually learn about it. These episodes aren't episodic; this is a serialized narrative, and we need to watch them all for the complete story and a complete context to view the entire story in. Reading through this thread, I'm left with one major supposition. There critics of this show are not watching it in good faith, whereas I am. Thus far, I trust the director and the writers to take me to a satisfactory conclusion. I've yet to see what I consider to be major errors of craft in the narrative and I'm willing to give this show the benefit of the doubt. It's obvious that some other viewers feel the opposite way, and, if it's their thing to hate watch Star Wars shows, that's cool with me. It's not mine, though, and that should be cool too. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Star Wars: The Acolyte [Spoilers]
Top