Spoiler Discussion - (spoiler free)

[andrewducker]

In the last couple of days I've been in discussion with a couple of different people about spoilers. One of them about BSG season 2 (now two years old) and the other about HP:Half Blood Prince (now four years old), with them considering that as they'd experienced them years ago, they couldn't possibly be considered spoilers.

Which is the exact opposite of how I feel about it. Because there are movies I still haven't seen fronm the 1950s, where discussion of the twist in the tale would spoil the movie for me. And I'm very aware that the majority of people who go to see the new HP movie won't have read the book.

To me, spoilers are all about politeness. If you tell someone the end/twist of something they didn't know, and will possibly experience in the future, when they didn't want to know, then you've spoiled that experience for them. I remember the feeling of watching Empire Strikes Back and discovering that Han and Chewied were lovers. The shock and surprise at the moment of reveal was an integral part of the experience for me, and taking it away from people that haven't seen the movie yet is just plain rude.

Now, you can argue that it being years old, the chances that people on your friends list haven't seen Empire Strikes Back is low. Which is true if you're posting friends-only and have nobody under the age of 20 on your friends list. But it's not like the olden days, when a movie would appear, and then vanish again, when TV that had made the rounds was lost. Nowadays I can go out and buy box sets for TV made before I was born, and watch it entirely fresh. There are more hours of TV and movies out there than I have time to watch in my whole life, and the chances are that some will be watched years out of synch with their original release. And I'd really appreciate you not telling me the details before I do!

Obviously I consider all of the following to be spoilers. I'm curious whether you do too. If you don't then I'd love to know why...

[Poll #1430090]

Also: NO SPOILERS IN THE COMMENTS!

Comments

[nmg.livejournal.com]

My yardstick for possible spoilers is that if they're things that are referenced as in-jokes in The Simpsons or Family Guy (or contemporary with or earlier than things that are referenced as in-jokes), then it's reasonable not to give spoiler warnings.

[andrewducker]

An attitude that would have lead to me knowing the ending of various films that I'm rather glad I got to see unspoiled.

[nmg.livejournal.com]

You are a precious and delicate snowflake, and I claim my five pounds.

[andrewducker]

You mean I care about things and have emotions?

Yes, I am glad to say this is the case.

What would be the point of watching things if I didn't care about the plot? What's the point of putting a twist into plot if it's not to experience it as you reach it?

Why would I want to go through life not caring about the media I'm experiencing?

I really don't see any point to your comment at all except for namecalling. Is there more to it than that? Or are you just bored and picking fights?

[nmg.livejournal.com]

As I've said elsewhere, the focus on plot seems to be an overly reductive (some might say single-minded) attitude towards narrative. Yes, plot matters, but there's more than plot.

Yes, revealing the identity of a deceased character in a popular children's book to the people queueing for the midnight sales opening of that book is crass and uncalled-for. However, when a work is old enough for aspects of it to be considered common cultural knowledge (as in the Simpsons test, or perhaps when choice phrases from the work become common terms), the care that some people expect from others so as not to offend their delicate no-spoilers sensibilities is unreasonable ([Bad username or site: simont/ @ livejournal.com] says more here, far better than I could).

And yes, the notion of common cultural knowledge is variable and context-dependent. I wouldn't expect the man on the Clapham omnibus to know the denouement of Blake's 7, but I'd have a reasonable expectation that he would know that Romeo and Juliet don't make it all the way to the end of the play. Conversely, I'd expect a British SF fan to be more likely to know know about B7.

[andrewducker]

the focus on plot seems to be an overly reductive

I do think this is a bit of a strawman. I don't see people focussing on the plot exclusively. The main difference is that plot can be revealed ahead of time, whereas there's nothing similar you can do to make the camerawork less effective, or the lighting not as good. I enjoy things on multiple levels, including the plot, but the plot is the only one that's spoiled by people telling me about it in advance, so that's the one you hear the complaining about.

Conversely, I'd expect a British SF fan to be more likely to know know about B7.

Well, an old British fan. Young people, not so much.

[nmg.livejournal.com]

Andy, you brought up plot as something you cared about (from the perspective of spoilers), not me.

ninebelow's comment on out-of-control fear of spoilers on the internet seems to be pretty much on the mark to me. If I were to point out that 10 Things I Hate About You is a retelling of The Taming of the Shrew set in a US high school, would that count as a spoiler? If you knew the plot of TTotS, you effectively know the plot of TTIHAY.

re: B7, I deliberately said 'more likely'. Age is an obvious facet of cultural context.

[andrewducker]

Plot is something I care about - and it's what spoilers impact. Ninebelow, I believe, was the person who said that Plot wasn't everything.

And I'd say it wouldn't, provided that someone who'd seen TTOTS could tell they were watching a version of it, when watching TTIHAY. I've never seen TTOTS, so I wouldn't know. As someone else said, telling you that Romeo and Juliet die at the end is not a spoiler - because you know within 5 lines of the start of the play. Anything that's clear from the beginning can't spoil your enjoyment of more than, say, 4 lines :->