*puts on meta helmet, raises hand timidly* Um, I'm apparently in the minority, but I loved the version you posted yesterday. No, it wasn't easy, and yes, I was sometimes confused, but - it felt like it should be that way. I'm bizarre like that; I'm overjoyed by things that I don't necessarily get the first time through. (This probably explains why I'm an English major.) I took it to be not just a ghost story, but a story about the ghosts we carry with us. The fact that Rodney could see the father didn't even twig my radar. It's a ghost; I mean, when you come right down to it, why can John see him? Plus, Rodney would be the one most likely to know the depths of John's issues, and it made sense for him to be aware of their manifestation. As to the ending, I was completely convinced John was settling in to write a nice, polite, fuckoff letter to Landry. *shrug*
I think it all comes down to this: I recently heard a pro author say, "I'm a participatory writer. I write for the same reason I read: to find out what happens." In this case, you have to go with the ending that's real in your head. God knows, I wish I could get some of mine to be hearts and bunnies moments, but that isn't what they need to be. I like the prickliness of yesterday's ending, and the disconnects. They felt right for the tone. Sometimes, messy is good.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-17 08:03 pm (UTC)I think it all comes down to this:
I recently heard a pro author say, "I'm a participatory writer. I write for the same reason I read: to find out what happens." In this case, you have to go with the ending that's real in your head. God knows, I wish I could get some of mine to be hearts and bunnies moments, but that isn't what they need to be. I like the prickliness of yesterday's ending, and the disconnects. They felt right for the tone. Sometimes, messy is good.