But who's to say when something needs to change? And who's to say that killing off a character is the only way to change things?
You can have danger and drama without actually killing the characters. The awareness of death can be there even if no one actually dies. And it's also possible to turf characters temporarily without actually killing them - they did it to the entire JSA when they sent them to limbo to fight Ragnarok, didn't they?
This is where the whole suspension of disbelief comes in. It's possible to be concerned for the outcome of a story when you know deep down in your heart of hearts that the character is going to survive. You know that House is always going to diagnose the problem and cure the patient, but it doesn't stop you from having to look away when the patient starts coughing up blood. When you know that House is probably going to fail and the patient is probably going to die... what's the point of watching? Except to hiss at Cameron for being a spineless wuss but that's another issue altogether.
Yes, there are occasional exceptions that prove the rule - Jason Todd comes to mind, as his death was planned, built up to, executed well, and affected canon long afterwards - but for the most part, I can think of a dozen different ways to get a character out of the picture without killing them off, all preferable to killing them off (on Coronation Street, they send them to Canada, which makes me giggle).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2006-01-22 10:07 am (UTC)You can have danger and drama without actually killing the characters. The awareness of death can be there even if no one actually dies. And it's also possible to turf characters temporarily without actually killing them - they did it to the entire JSA when they sent them to limbo to fight Ragnarok, didn't they?
This is where the whole suspension of disbelief comes in. It's possible to be concerned for the outcome of a story when you know deep down in your heart of hearts that the character is going to survive. You know that House is always going to diagnose the problem and cure the patient, but it doesn't stop you from having to look away when the patient starts coughing up blood. When you know that House is probably going to fail and the patient is probably going to die... what's the point of watching?
Except to hiss at Cameron for being a spineless wuss but that's another issue altogether.Yes, there are occasional exceptions that prove the rule - Jason Todd comes to mind, as his death was planned, built up to, executed well, and affected canon long afterwards - but for the most part, I can think of a dozen different ways to get a character out of the picture without killing them off, all preferable to killing them off (on Coronation Street, they send them to Canada, which makes me giggle).