- Neomenia wrote:
- I would prefer a science-fiction-oriented take on Slender Man to a metaphysical one, myself. I think there's greater potential for storytelling and a more compelling fictional world overall, if everything has a grounding which can be explained and understood. Slendy loses his shock value as something disturbing and seemingly impossible if he comes together with a reality in which the impossible can happen, just because.
You'd have to be careful about how far you go, however, with any interpretation or explanation. Explain Slender Man too well or too thoroughly and he can lose his impact.
Even though I do agree with you on the fact that one should be careful while directly providing readers with explanations as it would often affect the overall feeling of ambigousness that the mythos are so rich on, I would believe that completely dismissing of the creation of a basis defining the functioning of Slendy within the reality portrayed in your works would be rather detrimental to the story.
While most people would often don't look much into understanding the functioning of a fictional universes, to those with a more critical perspective, it would look like the author didn't bother making sure that their narration made sense, but rather just wrote up whatever random thing that hit their mind, regardless of how ridiculous the scenario would en up as, which, if at least to my opinion, is a mediocre approach to take, and mostly just seems disappointing. On this matter, I specifically Have encountered several people who deny to elaborate on certain matters, not to keep it ambiguous but because they openly accept to not have defined anything about them other than the fact that they happen. Of course on this case you imply not of the lack of definition merely for the ease of the author, but to keep the story on an atmosphere of wrongness, this though, doesn't seem help the fear factor at all in my opinion, but rather demote it to a simple feeling of nervousness resultant from experience of the pertaining material, and that quickly dissipates as the reader exits suspension of disbelief.
I'm not sure about you, but whenever I encounter a particular work of horror that deals with this kind of portrayal of a reality without a defined basis that regulates it, I can dispel the fear that it causes on me by simply logically arriving at the conclusion "this is obviously too ridiculous to ever work on an scenario not crafted for it to work. Rational believe on this kind of thing being plausible would require a considerable amount of far-fetched rationalizations, and thus I can be rather sure that things such as this will not happen to me, thereby there is nothing to fear". Merely by going over something like this, I can make sure that I will not be checking windows, or looking over my shoulders for The Slenderman, although I am likely to do it anyways because I am already quite paranoid without The Slenderman being on the picture, but that's not the point.
Take the slenderman Mythos, there can be several elements in Slenderman-based fiction that rather than collaborate to a feel of alienation, can get you to wonder what the bloody hell is going on. For example : Take distortion in Vlogs, the way in which distortion is handled can end up being a little bit too arbitrary. Sometimes it will go off when The Slenderman is close-by, sometimes it will only go off when the camera is directly facing slendy, and on other times, it will specifically go off in emphasization of an important plot-device, whereas The Slenderman's presence although implied, seems a tad too convenient. I mean, did he just teleport in, on the right time to hint something on the video? now, you may be thinking that different series will take different approaches on distortion, which is true, yet I am not referring to differences between Series, I am referring to the use several different approaches on the matter on specific series over time, like distortion happening when presence of the slenderman is implied, but while he is not directly in the shot, once, yet later on within another video, the distortion doesn't seem to go off until the camera has Slenderman directly in the shot, regardless of how close to him they were. this inconsistencies often get me to break immersion, by making me wonder whether it was slendy or the series' editor that was supposed to cause the distortion. On that matter, isn't the slenderman supposed to affect other kinds of electronic devices as well? I mean, sure The author is portraying his own interpretation of the lore, but, what exactly makes cameras so special that It will only affect cameras? It is not only cameras, even, It will also affect phones, and any other device that records or takes photos but only on that department. It also doesn't seem to matter what kind of device is being used, and although most people on slender Vlogs, and Blogs, seem to conveniently have a new camera that they had bought just a few weeks before the start of the sightings which casually confirms that the distortion effect was not a thing of the camera being old and dejected (although this requires the assumption that the pertaining character didn't get sold a defective camera), in most cases they all seem to be homogeneously affected, depending on the approach of course ( I.E. if several cameras are used on 1 series, chances are that there won't be many discernible differences on distortion between material gathered from the different cameras), which can be rather disconcerting. If slenderman's effect on technology can be so dependent on the device being affected as to not affect the victim's espresso machine, or printer on any major way, then why does it not seem to also be dependent on the type of device being used to capture his image?
in the cases in which he does indeed affect other types of devices, Isn't it a tad convenient that he almost always only affects devices that add tension to the narrative with their malfunctioning? such as lights blinking, and the T.V. suddenly going off by itself?
Any reason why he doesn't ever seem to affect things like a stove, a dishwasher, or a doorbell? If the effect was more general, one could suppose that he is emitting some sort of radiation, or something of the like, but the fact that it is so specific would require you to believe that the effect is caused by a much more complex and ridiculously convenient mechanism that only works on the few situational scenarios in which an effect is portrayed, the fact that there doesn't seem to be any other effect on the cameras, and/or other pertaining devices, and that they seem to return to usual behavior once the Slenderman ceases to be close-by is also quite baffling, because not only must the functioning of The Slenderman techno-screwing powers be basically crafted so that it works with the narrative (and not the other way around), but it also must be so that it disturbs functioning of cameras and/or other devices without even perturbing the structures that make them work on any permanent manner, all too situational.
Another relevant point to this is The Slenderman's very well known teleportation, Not the teleportation in itself, but the fact that he appears to be able to execute it effortlessly, basically just dissapearing, without going through any sort of rituals, without requiring any time, without seeming to be using any energy to do it, he just is standing there, then the next second, he is not; along with the fact that this remarkable teleportation technique doesn't seem to create any sort of discernible effects on his environment, there are no remnants, it's mostly like nothing had happened, he could teleport right behind you and in most depictions within the mythos you wouldn't notice until you turned your head around. No noise, no change on the temperature, no apparent effects on individuals nearby. It just seems a tad weird. Granted, the effects that his teleportation techniques causes on his surroundings; or requires to be successfully executed may transcend that which we may be able to discern by superficial inspection, and thus it will not be noticeable by a mere picture/video, and if the author of a blog post didn't notice it, of course he is not going to write about it, but that is just another rationalization required to take this as plausible right there. Also, Slenderman. Dude. you took the time to Teleport here with some sort of exceptional teleportation technique, so, why not do something other than stare?
Maybe I'm just looking at the right material, but, for some reason Slenderman always seems to just stand there and watch, either that or he is teleporting around, he may as well occasionally tilt his head around, and grow tentacles out of his back, but not as often as the two earlier actions. Is he like SCP-173? He will only move when no one is looking? Because there doesn't seem to be portrayals of him walking, that much, most of the times in which he does walk, he does so with his tentacles. He has legs right? can't he at least step to the right a few times to get a better look of his victim if he likes stalking so much? I get it that the unmoving deal is a major element on the lore, and can add a bit to the horror, since his lack of motion can often collaborate to the twisted image that the slenderman represents, he already has no face, is unproportionally elongated, and occasionally sports a reasonable deal of tentacles, but he also is disquietingly void. He doesn't seem to breath, he doesn't move around as most people do while awaiting something anxiously, he just carefully remains afoot, while amongst the shadows and the woodlands, just like a predator, remains on guard, awaiting for the right moment to strike on their prey; but it just seems to be taken a bit too much to the extreme, when a victim doesn't seem to EVER be able to witness the slenderman moving AT ALL in several months, if not years, of being stalked, by him. It's not exactly difficult to explain, even without a concrete basis defining it set by the author, you could reason it by saying that since he is capable of teleportation, moving around by feet would be inefficient, and, since he uses teleportation so much, his legs, and possibly his arms too; have eventually atrophied, but, under this reasoning, Why haven't his tentacles also atrophied? does he keep them covered in salt and stashed in a freezer within his pocket dimension while he is not using them? a more plausible explanation is that the form we see, the tall man with a suit is merely a cover for his true appearance. He never uses his legs, because they basically aren't functional legs, they don't have muscles, and the proportions are messed up, they're just there for show, but his tentacles are indeed functional, and properly structured. Still its an issue that often bothers me a bit.
All of this (among a few other points I May have missed on this redaction), easily decimates immersion to general suspension of disbelief. Sure when I understand something, It will give me a feel of security in cases of confrontation with it, because my understanding will allow me to design plans to manage the situation to my advantage while taking in consideration the possible scenarios in which I may find my self. If I lack understanding on a subject, though; Doubt will consume any of my intends on crafting anything similar to a plan to manage the situation. We as readers and writers, for example, acknowledge that A Gun will not be able to cause much damage to The Slenderman, yet a desperate and increasingly paranoid victim that has access to a fire arm may end up considering using it to assault his stalker. He will be taking a risk, Because he knows not whether the gun will work or not, and since opening fire against The Slenderman, will represent an obvious intend to kill him, or at least, harm him, one can suppose that he will react aggressively. If the victim understood how The Slenderman worked, though; he would know not to use a Gun, since it would be pointless, and, with his understanding, may as well be able to come up with a way to drive his Stalker away from him. But the fact that something makes sense, that there is some sort of basis regulating it's functioning, does not mean that everyone will instantly understand said basis, and functioning. There are several aspects of reality that Humans do not yet comprehend, but that does not mean that they are seemingly "impossible" or just lack of any sort of reasoning to their functioning. Having a defined basis, making it so that things work on a consistent reasoning, specifically one that can be directly linked to our reality, will make things plausible, thus allowing the reader to relate to the narrative on a more general basis. If it is plausible, rather than "Impossible", it will require people to conclude that "Although it is possible and plausible, it is unlikely, because recent reading/watching of material regarding these subjects, would make more direct experience a bit too coincidental. Current circumstances also point away from the believe of it, while not serving as a direct argument to disprove it", in order to disregard Slenderman as an issue at hand. So you go from Too ridiculous to happen to Too Unlikely to happen.
TL;DR : To my opinion, it would (under these circumstances) be more profitable for the story-telling to make the situation plausible, since it would allow the reader to relate to the events on the narrative, and enhance immersion.
Also, Science-Fiction is supposed to have a grounding which can be explained and understood. Perhaps the reasoning behind it is not likely to be truth in our reality, or is directly not truth in our reality; or perhaps, it just uses an ambiguous system that never is really much touched on during the narrative, but certainly has some sort of basis to it. Otherwise it would just be fantasy.
More on topic :
- slendernarwhal wrote:
- questions will be happily answered.
Care to elaborate a bit more on the Theory, or link me to a site where I can get more detailed information about it?
It sounds rather fascinating, I would like to read about it.
Mon Aug 13, 2012 1:35 pm
