True. You can do The Iliad in a movie, and the complete works of Shakespeare in about the same time. And yes, the observation that 90% of everything is crap means that even for good things, 90% of *that* is pointless bloat.
But I don't mean a story that cannot be told in under 100 hours, I mean a story that you do take 100 hours over, with plenty of time for diversion along the way that is entertaining and worthwhile even though it isn't critical. In particular the problem with commissioning a series and never saying whether it's the end or not, is that you cannot have a show which, taken as a whole, develops towards some kind of conclusion. Hence you doom it to stop rather than finishing, because when you do can it, it's unfinished.
Thinking about long-running series of novels: Miss Marple / Bond / etc are totally episodic. Elric has a definite conclusion, but Moorcock has the cunning plan of publishing that and getting it out of the way, then spinning out the middle bits indefinitely. Conan Doyle tried to conclude Sherlock Holmes, and wasn't allowed to. Robert Jordan died. Zelazny returned to Amber for a much weaker second quintet. George RR Martin asymptotically approaches finished as the length of each installement tends to infinity. Rowling may be many bad things, and clearly could have used editing with a pair of shears, but she did at least finish the damn thing.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2010-05-17 03:29 pm (UTC)But I don't mean a story that cannot be told in under 100 hours, I mean a story that you do take 100 hours over, with plenty of time for diversion along the way that is entertaining and worthwhile even though it isn't critical. In particular the problem with commissioning a series and never saying whether it's the end or not, is that you cannot have a show which, taken as a whole, develops towards some kind of conclusion. Hence you doom it to stop rather than finishing, because when you do can it, it's unfinished.
Thinking about long-running series of novels: Miss Marple / Bond / etc are totally episodic. Elric has a definite conclusion, but Moorcock has the cunning plan of publishing that and getting it out of the way, then spinning out the middle bits indefinitely. Conan Doyle tried to conclude Sherlock Holmes, and wasn't allowed to. Robert Jordan died. Zelazny returned to Amber for a much weaker second quintet. George RR Martin asymptotically approaches finished as the length of each installement tends to infinity. Rowling may be many bad things, and clearly could have used editing with a pair of shears, but she did at least finish the damn thing.