[B5JMS] Where is JMS? In the past he defended Sins Past

[b5jms at cs.columbia.edu]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: tphile <tphile at cableone.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 23:45:26 -0500
Lines: 53

Jms at B5 wrote:

>>No I don't expect that either.  I just want to know why the story was
>>written and why use Gwen...
> 
> 
> Jim, there is *no* good answer that is going to satisfy you on this issue.
> 
> Look...why does *anyone* write a story?  Because they think it's a good story. 
> What do you think writers base their decisions on?  Casting runes? 
> 
> Why use Gwen?  Because I needed a fair amount of time to grow the kids to have
> at least a fair chance of making it credible, logically it couldn't be
> MJ...who's left?  Betty?  Too obscure.
> 
> The key to writing, as somebody once said, is to put your character up a tree
> and throw rocks at them.  Gwen was the biggest rock I could find which would do
> the job.  
> 
> To ask any writer "why" or "was this story necessary?...what story is actually
> *necessary*?  What defines *necessary*?
> 
> You will never be satisfied with your line of questioning.
> 
>  jms
> 


JMS, imho you are putting the cart before the horse and evading the issue.
Before you can make the kids credible, you have to make the Gwen/Norman 
stuff credible.
and thats where it falls apart.   It is just not believable among the 
readers that Gwen would WILLINGLY sleep with Norman Osborn of all 
people.  She was too intelligent, too mature, too strong to do a 
Lewinsky or such,  and Norman was too unlikeable and she knew that too.
Its just too much for the fans to swallow  and they/we need to make that 
clear.   We are not gullible chumps willing to take whatever is shoved 
in front of us.
    Not becaues she is a madonna or a whore, but because it just doesn't 
make sense.
Its like Clark finding Lois in bed with Lex
or Susan Ivanova now a member of psi corp and in bed with Bester.
Willingly?

Not a chance in hell.

Perhaps if she was forced or mind controlled the fan reaction would be 
different.

but I will at least reserve final judgement on whether to read your 
books anymore until I see the rest of the story

tphile

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lines: 33
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Date: 10 Oct 2004 08:00:28 GMT

>
>JMS, imho you are putting the cart before the horse and evading the issue.

No, actually, I'm not.  If I say "I won't answer," or I change the subject to
another area entirely, that's evading the the issue, and the question was "why"
write a given story.  That's the question, and I answered that specific
question.  How is that evasion?  

If you mean the point you raise a sentence later, how can I evade something
that wasn't written until afterward?  

I answered the question I was asked.  I evaded nothing.

>Before you can make the kids credible, you have to make the Gwen/Norman 
>stuff credible.
>and thats where it falls apart.   It is just not believable among the 
>readers that Gwen would WILLINGLY sleep with Norman Osborn

Again, you are speaking for all readers when clearly there are many readers
here who do not agree with you.  What you are saying is that it didn't work for
*you* but if you are going to start speaking for others who don't agree with
your position, then it is you who are evading the facts, not I.


 jms

(jmsatb5 at aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2004 by synthetic worlds, ltd., 
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine 
and don't send me story ideas)