Work Text:
To my roommates, whose attention will hopefully be drawn by the bold colors and large text of this document before the screensaver comes on:
Television doesn't always have all the answers. Because being the type of thing to have all the answers is unsuited to the structure of story.
Let me explain.
The very existence of tropes seems to confirm for us the importance of having narratives follow patterns. Tropes are a neutral concept in and of itself, and specific ones can be good or bad based on almost anything, but let's be honest, it really does boil down to personal preference. The fact that nothing I do or say can shake the foundation of the continued existence of Bottle Episodes is proof enough of that. The types of patterns that film and television can follow are practically infinite, which raises its own questions that would be better answered by philosophers than by students of character, but it goes without saying that not all narrative patterns are created equal. There will always be defaults. Convention dictates that convention exists at the core of pop culture, for better or worse.
It makes our stories understandable, and just predictable enough so as to not shake up the system. Keeping certain aspects constant and in line with the norm is a tool that affords writers the most flexibility possible. Norms are a blank canvas, whereas deviation from it is bound by rules and thus restricts the variety of stories you can tell. Let's use romance as an example.
"Boy [Verb] Girl" is the cookie cutter foundation for almost all instances of romance in narrative, usually starting with [Meets] and branching off from there into any number of other verbs depending on what the story requires. Popular choices include [Dates], [Kisses], [Fights With], [Reunites With], perhaps even [Rescues] if it's an action sort of flick. There is a vague core default around which many iconic love stories have been built. Han and Leia. Jack and Rose. Harry and Sally. Peter and Mary Jane. Westley and Buttercup. They span a wide variety of genres and serve their various functions in the story as either a small or large part of it. Each story customizes its leading couple enough that it's rare for viewers to step back and take notice of the ways in which they're all the same:
1. White
2. Physically and mentally able/typical
3. Heterosexual
Films that subvert these defaults rarely make it into the mainstream canon of pop culture. They can be found under special headings on Netflix, or at indie festivals, but little else. They fail to gain mass appeal because they're "issue films". To some extent it's the narratives that are to blame, for being uninteresting by making the issue be the thing that guides the story instead of the genre, but that in turn is influenced by budget and public perception. I'm a director myself, so take your questions about that last part to a producer.
There's an unacknowledged and perhaps uncomfortable reality that has been waiting to be tackled head-on for some time now, and I see no reason to continue being indirect about it: I was raised on mainstream pop culture, populated almost entirely by characters fitting the three descriptors above. It's been something of a challenge to reconcile that with the fact that I share none of those characteristics.
I don't expect the first two to be of any particular surprise or interest to either of you, but I can envision both of you gasping as you make the connection between the third one and me. Glad to be ahead of the game. Truth is, this is my coming out letter, and the declaration that I have to make to the both of you because of your significance in my day-to-day life is that if I were to attach an arbitrary label to myself, I would say that I'm pansexual.
(Annie, I'll bring home a book from the library soon. Troy, think of it as bisexuality for now.)
Due to what I've been told about boundaries and oversharing, I'll refrain from citing my personal history to any greater extent than "this would explain a lot about the Dungeons and Dragons game" which I imagine both of you are thinking anyway. There was a rather telling interview that I conducted with Dean Pelton last week, but that's for a project that's still under wraps so I can't show it to anyone yet. I've learned from the last time I let footage be released prematurely. If it's okay with you Troy, I'd also like to speak to you in private at some point. And to tie back into what I was saying before, my personal narrative has never lent itself to being a perfect replica of popular culture, but I see that as all the more reason to break into the business. I won't consider my job done until I don't have to change anything about myself to play the hero.
Anyway, this conversation certainly doesn't stop here. I have a hunch that Britta will be getting herself involved in this sooner rather than later. There may be a conflict with Shirley, Jeff and Pierce will most likely play sidelining roles. Not the most interesting way things could possibly play out, but if there's some way of integrating a believable coming out story into a sitcom setup that doesn't bring the show to a screeching halt, I'd like to see it.
I'll be home at around six with ice cream.
Abed Nadir