I agree that it is a conversation, too. And that's why I think it should be held to the standard of reasonableness.
A comparison of the way motifs are used in different works, in the sense of talking about how the motif fits into the motive of the author is a line of conversation well-worth pursuing. See Aycheb's posts as an example of doing exactly that. She's identifying how the motifs fit in very different ways into the themes the author is exploring and using that to explain why the styles are different. You can still prefer Moore's story and his style. I just don't think it's fair to criticize Whedon's style because it doesn't match the story Moore is telling with the motif. Whedon is telling a different story with a different purpose and with a correspondingly different sensibility. I hope that makes sense.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-07-14 01:39 pm (UTC)A comparison of the way motifs are used in different works, in the sense of talking about how the motif fits into the motive of the author is a line of conversation well-worth pursuing. See Aycheb's posts as an example of doing exactly that. She's identifying how the motifs fit in very different ways into the themes the author is exploring and using that to explain why the styles are different. You can still prefer Moore's story and his style. I just don't think it's fair to criticize Whedon's style because it doesn't match the story Moore is telling with the motif. Whedon is telling a different story with a different purpose and with a correspondingly different sensibility. I hope that makes sense.