The Pathfinder lander, with the little Sojourner wheeled rover, being prepared for launch. |
First of all, why couldn't the astronaut have simply said, "Easy, I'll use Pathfinder?" The audience likely doesn't recognize what that means immediately and, even if they do, the information does little to dampen the suspense. Actually, I think the suspense would be greater, since the audience has information NASA doesn't yet possess. Why prevent the audience from knowing? Especially since the reveal of Pathfinder isn't fully understood until the beginnings of actual communications. I believe it's a lost opportunity to raise the level of storytelling.
I'm not sure if this is a trend, but it does pop up frequently. The funny thing is, keeping this information hidden is actually more work for the author, because it's really hard to misdirect an intelligent audience, so authors are forced to omit information and send characters wheeling about in a frenzy of non-explanation. Agatha Christie's "Murder on the Orient Express" is a great example of doing it properly. Everything the detective knows is expressed to the audience, and we have the possibility (unlikely as it is) to figure out the solution before him.
Modern audiences are wise to story trickery, jaded by overused clichés, and eager to see anything new. Myself, I long for meaty concepts that stretch my imagination, and to enjoy stories that don't hold my hand and treat me like a grown-up. Don't arbitrarily hide something so there's a "zinger" later. I want to be in on the joke. I want to know what's going on. I want to be an active part of the story!
- M
No comments:
Post a Comment