Spoilers don't really spoil anything

[retKHAAAN]

lol...I don't think that Shinigami357 or I were even hinting that we would ever actively or intentionally spoil a story for someone... we're merely in agreement that it's nothing to get your panties in a bunch over.

I "care" about every story I read/see. Even the shitty ones. I try to figure out what the writer/director was going for and whether I feel they accomplished what they set out to do. A good story sucks you in, evokes some sort of feeling (much like a good song), regardless of whether you already know what's going to happen and to whom.

I can admit that sometimes a plot twist can be effective. However, over the past couple decades the plot twist has become a gimmick. Often times the plot twist at the end is written first and the rest of the story is merely filler leading up to it.

 

[xist]

So you don't agree that it's MORE enjoyable/thrilling if you don't know anything in advance?

 

[retKHAAAN]

So you don't agree that it's MORE enjoyable/thrilling if you don't know anything in advance?

It depend on whether I feel a plot twist is necessary or merely a gimmick. Varies by story. Some movie examples:

Necessary:
The Usual Suspects
Fight Club
The Sixth Sense
Unbreakable
Seven
Memento
Psycho


Unnecessary:
Shutter Island
Every other M. Night Shamalamadingdong movie
Hide and Seek
Secret Window
Identity
Fallen (but still a good movie

)

 

[Gahars]

Knowing what's going to happen ahead of time in a story doesn't automatically ruin it, but it does diminish a lot of the enjoyment.

After all, a gripping story will rely on suspense, and if you already know the answer to the mystery/the real bad guy/the hero's back story/etc., a lot of that suspense is gone.

 

[xist]

List of films....

I actually felt that Shutter Island and Fightclub shared the same sort of idea. Once you know the story when you rewatch it you do so in a totally different way, thus if they're spoiled you lose that natural first viewing feeling of "I'm so clever i have it all worked out" and the grand reveal at the end which prompts the "Oh.... yeah".

 

[Shinigami357]

wait...so if you're not bothered by spoilers you either don't care about the material or you lack imagination?

If you personally don't care AND you don't care that others may care when you don't and proceed to spoil it for them regardless.

Wait... I get the last part... Spoiling it for others is rude, I can agree with that. But not caring for a spoiler is possible for people who both love the material and have imagination.

You see, a spoiler is one fact. That's it. And art, however you may view it, isn't for facts. I'll repeat myself for the umpteenth time and say - art is about the experience. If you can allow one fact to ruin the experience that shouldn't be focused on facts, then that is disrespectful of art itself.

And as much as you can throw the typical "oh this guy told me what happened in [insert name of manga, anime, book, movie etc, what have you] and it sucked," deal, there are some facts you cannot deny about spoilers and everything else.

Think of the Mona Lisa. Everyone knows it has no eyebrows, heck, most people have seen it on Google or Wiki or something. They know it. Bring them to the Louvre, and I guarantee, they'll still be mesmerized by the painting. Why? Because they allow themselves, in that moment in time, to push aside everything they know about the painting, and just stand there, look at it. Experience each careful brush stroke da Vinci put into it.

That, I believe, is how people should see art, whether it be a painting, book, movie, heck, video game. As much as you can claim that spoilers ruin it for some, we can claim back that art, when viewed properly, is impossible to ruin.

 

[nryn99]

wait...so if you're not bothered by spoilers you either don't care about the material or you lack imagination?

If you personally don't care AND you don't care that others may care when you don't and proceed to spoil it for them regardless.

Wait... I get the last part... Spoiling it for others is rude, I can agree with that. But not caring for a spoiler is possible for people who both love the material and have imagination.

You see, a spoiler is one fact. That's it. And art, however you may view it, isn't for facts. I'll repeat myself for the umpteenth time and say - art is about the experience. If you can allow one fact to ruin the experience that shouldn't be focused on facts, then that is disrespectful of art itself.

And as much as you can throw the typical "oh this guy told me what happened in [insert name of manga, anime, book, movie etc, what have you] and it sucked," deal, there are some facts you cannot deny about spoilers and everything else.

Think of the Mona Lisa. Everyone knows it has no eyebrows, heck, most people have seen it on Google or Wiki or something. They know it. Bring them to the Louvre, and I guarantee, they'll still be mesmerized by the painting. Why? Because they allow themselves, in that moment in time, to push aside everything they know about the painting, and just stand there, look at it. Experience each careful brush stroke da Vinci put into it.

That, I believe, is how people should see art, whether it be a painting, book, movie, heck, video game. As much as you can claim that spoilers ruin it for some, we can claim back that art, when viewed properly, is impossible to ruin.

Paarish and i disagree that you can compare a story to a picture. you can't compare a dancer to a singer.

also, read my previous post.


------------
shutter island and secret window, for me the surprise wasn't much it's more like you just know. that's it, you just witness how the story happened. i think this is what shinigami is talking about.

 

[Hells Malice]

Wait... So it is impossible to get enjoyment for anything that doesn't give you that little moment of surprise? The twist is everything? I still beg to disagree.

You see, IMHO, it's now about knowing what happens. It's in knowing how it happens. That's the magic of art. It's how things are set-up, how they happen how everything goes after, that's art.

Like the example in the OP [IIRC]. Snape kills Dumbledore [should I put that in spoiler tags? don't want to infuriate people]. Now imagine that you are told this before reading the novel.

Sure, we know the Dumbledore dies, and Snape had a hand in it. What can't really be spoiled is everything else. We don't know that Dumbledore just went horcrux-hunting. That he was weakened after drinking the potion protecting the locket. We don't know the circumstances [was there a showdown? a duel? was it revenge? betrayal?], the setting [where? when? was the place ideal for murder or was it a place where accidents can happen?], the motive [had Snape switched over to the Dark Lord? etc etc?]. We don't even know how Snape killed him. Highlight the fact that aside from being very good at the Dark Arts, Snape is also the Potions master. Could he have used that? We don't know who was there [if Harry was there, could Dumbledore perhaps sacrificed himself for Harry? etc?]. We don't know how Snape reacted [happy? sad? shocked? etc?].

Really, when we are told that "Snape kills Dumbledore", have we experienced yet what really happened? Do we really feel, at the moment that we are told, the way that people who know the character feel when they experience the particular scene? Can we justify to ourselves and to the story that the whole thing is ruined? I think not.

If you don't dwell on it; if you can preserve everything else, you can still experience what happens the way you're supposed to experience it. Let it go, and read the story.

Now imagine if you had dwelt on that fact. Scoured message boards, maybe. You might be one of those people who read the books and loathe Snape. If you know that he killed Dumbledore, you'll formulate your own scenarios. Vice-versa, if you liked Snape, you'd then doubt yourself, maybe the story itself. When you find out what really happens [fan theories are rarely right] you'd be no better off, because you were expecting something, and you were wrong. In effect, from that one little piece of info, you've ruined the book for yourself.

See the difference?

You really never addressed my other post. Who here said that spoilers destroy and defeat the purpose of a story?
Not I. I said that the first time is always better, and that watching something again can still be fantastic even if you know exactly what'll happen, but it never compares to that first time. Instead you pretty much just started talking about forests and stumps and called anyone who disagreed with you a basket case. Good argument skills bro.

I'll say it again. Sure, spoilers wont ruin a story. It just takes away the true magic you'll only get to experience once per story. If you don't care about the magical awesomeness of immersing yourself for the first time in an epic story, I can totally see your viewpoint that spoilers don't matter.

 

[xist]

stuff

Appreciating a painting in the way you describe, when using cinematography as a measure, would be comparable to commenting on the lighting and camera work. For books it'd be the writers style and compositional skill.

You can't compare something which has a timeline of reveals which is supposed to be followed, to something that doesn't like a picture (unless you squint a lot, and slowly open your eyes).

Oh and this ->
QUOTE(Hells Malice @ Aug 13 2011, 09:08 PM) I'll say it again. Sure, spoilers wont ruin a story. It just takes away the true magic you'll only get to experience once per story. If you don't care about the magical awesomeness of immersing yourself for the first time in an epic story, I can totally see your viewpoint that spoilers don't matter.

 

[Shinigami357]

@Narayan - Being somewhat of an aspiring writer, I'd really disagree. Art is art. You can write a story that is - brush stroke for brush stroke - the artistic equivalent of a picture [it's part of the reason why novels even have covers]. Of course, since stories are linguistic and pictures are visual, I can't [and in fact did not] claim that that are the same. I am, however, claiming that they are, in essence, similar in that they are both art.

That was my point of comparison. Don't think of it as a direct comparison. Think of it was a comparative view of their similarities.

PS
Dancers and singers both have rhythm, beat, tempo. Dancers have motion, singers have lyrics. Again, not claiming that they are the same - only that they are similar.


PPS

I'll get to that previous post... hm...

 

[nryn99]

oh yeah,

that was a bad example of mine. (about dancers/singers)

anyway, xist already explained it.

 

[xist]

Is the experience of viewing the Mona Lisa changed if you've discussed eyebrows in advance. Not really no, as you appreciate the artist's skill and the picture itself. Is the experience of watching a film like Fight Club changed if it's spoilt in advance? Yes. The entire experience you would have had the first time is lost forever, and the change in perspective you have is immense compared to that of someone viewing the Mona Lisa knowing about an omission.

 

[retKHAAAN]

Appreciating a painting in the way you describe, when using cinematography as a measure, would be comparable to commenting on the lighting and camera work. For books it'd be the writers style and compositional skill.

You can't compare something which has a timeline of reveals which is supposed to be followed, to something that doesn't like a picture (unless you squint a lot, and slowly open your eyes).

Except the problem is oversaturation. Between video games, books, movies, music, comics, poems, plays....we've seen it all. Some people more than others. It's near impossible to show us something we haven't seen before in some other story on some other day... So the real magic lies in how these ideas we're already privy to can be molded into a coherent tale, not in what kinds of plot twists can be inserted and where...

 

[Paarish]

I agree that art is art. However progressing through a story and looking at a painting is different.
When you read/watch a story you learn things as you go on.
Compared with a picture where everything is shown in one blow.

 

[Shinigami357]

stuff

Appreciating a painting in the way you describe, when using cinematography as a measure, would be comparable to commenting on the lighting and camera work. For books it'd be the writers style and compositional skill.

You can't compare something which has a timeline of reveals which is supposed to be followed, to something that doesn't like a picture (unless you squint a lot, and slowly open your eyes).

Oh and this ->
QUOTE(Hells Malice @ Aug 13 2011, 09:08 PM) I'll say it again. Sure, spoilers wont ruin a story. It just takes away the true magic you'll only get to experience once per story. If you don't care about the magical awesomeness of immersing yourself for the first time in an epic story, I can totally see your viewpoint that spoilers don't matter.

Timeline of reveals? Tell me, truthfully, when you look at something, do you immediately see everything? No, you don't. This has been proven scientifically. The human eye is designed to wander all over the subject, taking in details with every "sweep" [for lack of better turn]. It's innate in humans not to take in everything they see in one go. It's a hard-wired thing, you can't even deny it.



On that quote...

I already said this once before, I think. Art [whatever the medium] is not about facts. I believe your view of immersion differs from mine, and I guess I'll have to work around that.

You know VR? Simulators? Hypnosis, even. That's immersion. The fact is, it's not real, and yet to you, it is. That's my view of immersion. It's all-encompassing. In true immersion, you can do it again and again, it doesn't change.

Also, like I said, my point isn't that I don't care for the "magical awesomeness" of immersing myself. I simply don't allow one thing to deter me. I think most people can't relate to this because when they see a spoiler, they jump on it and [again, I repeat] spoil the immersion for themselves.

This is my point here: don't let one thing spoil everything. Don't take that one little detail and let it eat into your experience. Is it that hard to understand this? The way you experience things is up to you, because it is you experiencing them [like I said before]. Therefore, it is also up to you if you will let it get spoiled.

I hope that was clear enough.

 

[nryn99]

Appreciating a painting in the way you describe, when using cinematography as a measure, would be comparable to commenting on the lighting and camera work. For books it'd be the writers style and compositional skill.

You can't compare something which has a timeline of reveals which is supposed to be followed, to something that doesn't like a picture (unless you squint a lot, and slowly open your eyes).

Except the problem is oversaturation. Between video games, books, movies, music, comics, poems, plays....we've seen it all. Some people more than others. It's near impossible to show us something we haven't seen before in some other story on some other day... So the real magic lies in how these ideas we're already privy to can be molded into a coherent tale, not in what kinds of plot twists can be inserted and where...

yes, but i think it's just your standards that changed after watching something awesome/or getting bored with the same story and you want something "new".
that doesn't necessarily make a story lose it's magic for new people.

edit: nvm, i'm not sure about my post because i didn't understand your last sentence due to my lacking in vocabulary.

 

[xist]

Ultimately i agree with the idea of over-saturation and implementation of ideas being the new "magic", but given that the experience offered by a film, game or book can be irrevocably altered (barring amnesia) if plot details are issued in advance i just can't wholeheartedly agree. Sure there will always be those more jaded and immune to the plot details, but for those who want to experience something in the way it was intended spoilers are important for preserving that first time through.

 

[nryn99]

Timeline of reveals? Tell me, truthfully, when you look at something, do you immediately see everything? No, you don't. This has been proven scientifically. The human eye is designed to wander all over the subject, taking in details with every "sweep" [for lack of better turn]. It's innate in humans not to take in everything they see in one go. It's a hard-wired thing, you can't even deny it.
xist is basically talking about when you look at the picture, what chances are you first look at the nose, then the mouth, then the ears, sequentially?
in a story, you don't start from the middle. you always start at page 1.



QUOTE(Shinigami357 @ Aug 14 2011, 04:25 AM) Also, like I said, my point isn't that I don't care for the "magical awesomeness" of immersing myself. I simply don't allow one thing to deter me. I think most people can't relate to this because when they see a spoiler, they jump on it and [again, I repeat] spoil the immersion for themselves.

This is my point here: don't let one thing spoil everything. Don't take that one little detail and let it eat into your experience. Is it that hard to understand this? The way you experience things is up to you, because it is you experiencing them [like I said before]. Therefore, it is also up to you if you will let it get spoiled.

I hope that was clear enough.

it's not that we let spoilers ruin us. if we don't like it we don't read it. you are assuming we are those who sees a spoiler, reads it then goes "nooooooo why did you have to say that??????"
not everyone are like that. we know how to enjoy something even spoiled accidentally. we only PREFER.

 

[xist]

Timeline of reveals? Tell me, truthfully, when you look at something, do you immediately see everything? No, you don't. This has been proven scientifically. The human eye is designed to wander all over the subject, taking in details with every "sweep" [for lack of better turn]. It's innate in humans not to take in everything they see in one go. It's a hard-wired thing, you can't even deny it.

I actually have a first class degree in Visual Optics and another in Biology so we can play hardball about the science of vision and the neural pathways involved if you wish....

When viewing a painting is it important to the whole piece to see the details in a particular order? If so how would the experience change if you saw it in the wrong order first? Ultimately your impression of that painting remains the same and you appreciate it in the same way.

With a book or film, if you started from the end and worked your way backwards would that ruin it? Yep.

 

[Shinigami357]

I'll prob be out of the pc soon [lol at schedules]. So, one last go at it.

I think the problem we have here is that people think spoiler=ruined. Their argument is that the "moment" has happened too prematurely for their liking.

Let me put it this way. I said a spoiler is one fact. So far, no one has disagreed, and I think it's rather logical to acknowledge that all spoilers are indeed just a fact.

Now a fact can be everything or nothing in art. xist says that your view of the mona lisa changes if you've discussed eyebrows. I think not, but it highlights something.

A spoiler is nothing more than a trigger.

To that mona lisa example... The eyebrows are one of many things that da Vinci incorporated into the painting - it just happens to be the most obvious, and therefore, more oft-discussed. And discussing mona lisa's eyebrows [or lack thereof] therefore leads to discussion about mona lisa herself [weird to call a painting like a person, LOL].

Again, to the earlier example.: Snape kills Dmbledore. People who know these characters will discuss it. It also just happens that they are two rather central characters. Thus, more interest in the spoiler is generated, and more people will then try to make heads or tails of it.

If I told you that the mona lisa had this many brush strokes, I think people will ignore me. It's still a spoiler on the painting, but people don't see paintings to count brush strokes, despite it playing a part in how the painting became to be. Also, if I told people what Slughorn's favorite snack is, they'd mostly ignore me. That's something else that figures into the story later on, but people will dismiss it.

Now, why would they? Because the power of a spoiler is to trigger a person to try to experience the thing before they should, thus ruining it. It's the reason spoilers are made only of things that draw attention.

Again, like I said, ruining something, is not a spoiler's fault - it is yours. By turning the trigger on, you're making yourself look into something prematurely, and thus, it gets ruined.


I rest my case.