The Decreasing Impact of Death In Sci-fi

brumgrunt writes "Are science fiction TV shows and movies overusing death as a plot device? And, more crucially, do any of us believe that a dead character is really dead any more?"

Comments

Nothing new to see here

[elrous0]

Characters dying on television and being brought back at the convenience of the show has been a staple of television for decades. This rather lame plot device has been abused most egregiously on soap operas (both daytime and nighttime), where this sort of thing has been the norm almost from the get-go. Everyone who came up in the 80's remembers the infamous Dallas "missing season" that was dismissed as a mere amazingly-long dream sequence after Patrick Duffy decided he wanted his big Dallas paycheck after all. Evil twins, faked deaths, clones, cliffhangers where the character miraculously survives, etc. have been used by soap operas again and again as bargaining ploys against cocky cast members whose contracts are up for renewal and as ways to generate buzz for shows with flagging ratings.

Even genre shows have been using these ploys for a long time. Forver Knight was infamous back in the early 90's for killing off characters and bringing them back (or sometimes not). And the "Did they really kill off Fox Mulder?" cliffhanger became such a cliche on the X-files that even the most gullible fans eventually caught on to the fact that the network wasn't about to kill off the star of the series (by the time they did finally get rid of him briefly, no one even cared). And of course, replacing Dr. Who's became the norm back long before most of us were even born.

Re:Nothing new to see here

[Moraelin]

Hell, it's been a plot device for ever, not just in television.

You may remember hearing about a really old character who was killed, was buried, and then to the amazing of everyone involved, *wham* they live again. You know who I'm talking about, right? Yep, Snow White and her glass coffin. Or Osiris. Or Dionysus. Or the couple dozen killed-oops-he-lives-again deities the cult of Osiris-Dionysus eventually assimilated. Read: pretty much any vegetation deity known around the Mediterranean. Or, oh, right, that dude in Jerusalem that a bunch of Romans nailed to a stick and made a scarecrow out of, circa 32 AD ;)

Re:Nothing new to see here

[eviloverlordx]

Actually, he did. Unfortunately, MacBeth II: Scottish Boogaloo was such a failure at The Globe box office that Shakespeare didn't include it in the First Folio.

Re:Nothing new to see here

[TheRaven64]

that Shakespeare didn't include it in the First Folio

<pedant>Shakespeare didn't include anything in the First Folio. It was published after his death by some of his friends. All of his plays were sold directly to theatres for performance, which is why so many of them are lost.</pedant>

Re:Nothing new to see here

[c6gunner]

I believe his name was Bryan.

One nice thing...

[grub]

... at least we didn't see Greedo get up off the cantina floor.

Way to go, Jesus

[KarlIsNotMyName]

Ruining death for everyone.

Yes Yes...

[nebaz]

This is absolutely true. The most egregious example is a character from the blockbuster Sci-Fi series "South Park", a character named Kenny seems to die almost every week. Long live Mysterion!

Give Tolkien a break

[PhilHibbs]

Complaining about Gandalf's resurrection is a bit thin, since it hadn't really been abused all that much when Tolkien wrote LotR.

Re:Give Tolkien a break

[discord5]

it hadn't really been abused all that much when Tolkien wrote LotR.

Well, there was that Jesus fellow, but the story wasn't nearly as good.

Re:Give Tolkien a break

[hey!]

Well, the question shouldn't be how frequently *other* authors abuse a device. The question should be whether a specific *story* abuses a device.

I think "abuse" in this case means the author undermining the logic of his own story to achieve something that takes more skill than he's displayed. Killing a character off for emotional impact then simply saying, "well death is a reversible process in this universe" throws doubt on *everything* in the story. That doesn't preclude resurrecting a character, but the resurrection has to be handled on a level above in-universe machinery if the reader is not to feel cheated.

I've heard a lot of literary complaints about LotR over the years, and most of them are from people with an obviously superficial understanding of the story. Yet the criticism that Gandalf's resurrection is a bit of a dodge is one of the ones most worth considering. Perhaps the strongest defense that can be mounted for Tolkien is that Gandalf's resurrection was narratively *unnecessary*. We saw Gandalf fall and *assumed* he was killed, but Tolkien takes pains to show that we jumped to a premature conclusion. Gandalf actually survived the fall, and only perished (if I recall) several days later after hunting down and killing the Balrog.

This actually shows some unusual artistic instinct on Tolkien's part. Normally resurrection would be a cheap plot device to get a killed off character back, but Tolkien actually takes the trouble of getting the character back *without recourse to resurrection*. This leaves him free to put resurrection on the table without making the reader feel cheated. Furthermore since Gandalf is already in an exempt category as an immortal (we know, for example, that *Sauron* came back after he was presumed dead), he *can* be resurrected without bringing all deaths in the story into question. Gandalf's resurrection doesn't mean that Boromir or Theoden or any of the various other mortal characters might return.

Re:Coming back as vampires doesn't count ...

[Culture20]

Three words for an awesome TV show:
Forever
Knight
Rider.

David Hasselhoff is a Vampire with a talking computer car that can telekinetically open mechanical locks. "KITT, the Sun's coming up, Tint the windows!" "I'm sorry Michael, the tinting circuits were damaged by KARR." "Then Turbo-boost!"

Won't you please help?

[jeko]

EXT: WOODLAND MEADOW, HAPPY FLUFFY BABY JOKES AT PLAY

                                                        VOICEOVER
Every year, thousands of baby jokes are clubbed to death by needless explanation
and exposition.

Hordes of Explanations armed with cudgels descend on the meadow, splashing blood
among the flowers. Comically high-pitched screams echo through the forest.

                                                        VOICEOVER
With your help, we can help end this atrocity. With your support, even if we can save only
one joke from senseless needless death...

PUSH IN ON THE WET QUIVERING EYES OF A BABY JOKE HIDING UNDER A LOG.
AUDIO BEGINS OF "WE CAN SAVE THE LAUGHTER" BY PEABO BRYSON

                                                        VOICEOVER
Won't you please help?