Photo title; "A rose by any other name"
Confusion, misdirection and overall twistedness: are they only successful because of bad communication or indeed avoidance of any meaningful conversations? It certainly works well for swirling around plots in books. When the reader is only permitted to see what the writer has written. Thus increasing and backing up the reasons for the main protagonist activities. Through the lifetime of the story these misconceptions can continue. Other character actions can seem, weak, incidental or indeed completely bewildering in comparison. Their behaviour often leaving the reader almost disregarding what is really going on with them. Their exploits become almost an after thought. That is until the end, at that point when that nasty little twist jumps up and grabs you.
But does it still work when the book is turned into a television programme? Jumping out of the page and reflecting a more normal and recognisable world. Populated with characters that look like us, talk like us and may well act like us depending on the situation. Filming allows the watcher to see all these misdirection’s before the original writer would have allowed. How many times have you caught yourself shouting at the telly “Oh for goodness sake how could they not see that. Look at what they did there, he should have spotted that a mile away.” But then as viewers we have been privy to all the facts and the intricate relations between all the players. We’ve heard the language shared between the various characters. We have been shown visibly why they didn’t question certain things. Why they made up their minds without really communicating properly with each other. Why they ended up angry and possibly hurt.
Are we then almost passive participants when we read? Our thinking taken over by our utter involvement in the world the writer has developed? The visual story taking place in our mind fuelled by words which themselves create images from that very writing; not from our own natural reactions. Mere simulations of what we perceive from the authors point of view. Writers try and reflect upon often complex situations from real life in different ways. Forcing us to ask questions of ourselves and our actions. At the very least we should consider, does all misdirection and confusion follow on from a lack of good, meaningful communication? Are we left at the end feeling that a twisted mind has somehow flavoured all that we have comprehended? And if so, are we mature enough to question these perceptions; is that what the writers are trying to say to us?