Ah...I'm reluctant to even wander into this mess because...you know my non-thoughts on the comics. I don't like to try to discuss them since I don't read them.
But I'm seeing a logic mishap with some of these complaints about S8 that's been bothering me. I figure you'd be the most sympathetic to it. :)
Cause...people are saying that S8 is derivative of Source X (though what Source X is seems to vary). Then, S8 is judged on that basis and found to be a failure.
If the latter is true, then wouldn't it be easier to conclude that S8 isn't derivative of Source X and is, instead, doing its own thing (perhaps with a few Buffy-style homages)? Or is the premise of S8 being derivative a hard and settled fact that can't be adjusted?
It just seems that the end result (The conclusion that S8 is a failure) is the primary starting place, and so arguments to prove it are often based on some shaky logic that just doesn't hold up.
I mean, take Normal Again, which uses a pretty standard sci-fi premise (It's all in the character's head!). Let's say some classic sci-fi story used that prior to Buffy used that trope and let's call it Source A. It would be awkward to see criticism of NA on the basis that it's derivative of Source A, but it does so poorly, therefore the episode sucks. If that's the conclusion, wouldn't it be better to attempt to view and judge the episode based on its own merits? Or is the derivation of Source A that set in stone?
Ah, I probably shouldn't even wade into this. But I've done stupider things during my time in fandom.
no subject
But I'm seeing a logic mishap with some of these complaints about S8 that's been bothering me. I figure you'd be the most sympathetic to it. :)
Cause...people are saying that S8 is derivative of Source X (though what Source X is seems to vary). Then, S8 is judged on that basis and found to be a failure.
If the latter is true, then wouldn't it be easier to conclude that S8 isn't derivative of Source X and is, instead, doing its own thing (perhaps with a few Buffy-style homages)? Or is the premise of S8 being derivative a hard and settled fact that can't be adjusted?
It just seems that the end result (The conclusion that S8 is a failure) is the primary starting place, and so arguments to prove it are often based on some shaky logic that just doesn't hold up.
I mean, take Normal Again, which uses a pretty standard sci-fi premise (It's all in the character's head!). Let's say some classic sci-fi story used that prior to Buffy used that trope and let's call it Source A. It would be awkward to see criticism of NA on the basis that it's derivative of Source A, but it does so poorly, therefore the episode sucks. If that's the conclusion, wouldn't it be better to attempt to view and judge the episode based on its own merits? Or is the derivation of Source A that set in stone?
Ah, I probably shouldn't even wade into this. But I've done stupider things during my time in fandom.