• queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    15 hours ago

    People do that all the time though, often to disastrous effect. Once it stops happening IRL we’ll stop making art about it*.

    * while it does happen all the time IRL, I think some writers use it as a shortcut to get to the plot they want to pursue without going through the character development that establishes why a character might act this way. That is lazy and annoying writing, but it doesn’t invalidate the whole trope. People really are like that. Clear communication is hard work and a lot of people just don’t do it a lot of the time.

    • NekoKoneko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Sure, sometimes people are like that, but even if it meets the absolute minimum standards of plausibility, why on earth would I waste my time watching/reading it? It’s just bad writing either way.

      Relatedly: everything is art, but not everything is good.

      • queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I don’t think it’s an automatic “bad writing” if a character does something that a human might do, even if it’s a monumentally stupid thing to do. Humans are just like that sometimes. Sometimes it adds to a story, sometimes its incidental to an otherwise fine story, sometimes it’s a lazy device to help a writer deliver pages on a deadline. Whether it’s bad writing is contextual.

        Re: your relatedly: I highly recommend bad art. We’re appallingly bad at classifying art as “good” and “bad” to begin with, and even when we have an agreed-upon standard, most art is a mix of the two. I have found that not taking other people’s opinions on art at face value has led me to some very enjoyable art.