Oddly controversial statements

[womzilla]

Here's one I still consider to be innocuous: "I like to encounter stories in the order that their authors intended them to be told." When I said this in the comics shop yesterday, everyone laughed and agreed.

Okay, phrased that way, it doesn't seem particularly controversial. But if you rephrase it as "I don't like spoilers", it apparently attracts the type of asshole who then reels off as many spoilers as possible before you shut them up. Back in Usenet days, I killfiled at least one person whose posts I otherwise enjoyed once he made it clear that he actively enjoyed spoiling stories for people who hate spoilers.

You can re-read a work many times. But you can only read it the first time, once. And surprise is a valid reaction to artistic works that, unlike most responses, can be taken away.

(Have I mentioned recently that I have seen Kevin Spacey more times on stage than on film? By which I mean, I've never seen The Usual Suspects, but I've had it spoiled for me at least a dozen times. Which reminds me of the time I was talking with supergee and he revealed that he knew that Spacey was gay but didn't know he was an actor. Now that's a different way of slicing the information of the world.)

Comments

[ritaxis.livejournal.com]

I don't have the spoiler thing, and I barely understand it, but I do understand that people do have it, and I do try to be polite about it. I do worry though, that not having the thing about spoilers, I won't be sensitive to exactly what constitutes a spoiler. On Usenet I used to warn people that I wasn't sure what was a spoiler and what wasn't, so if they were really put off by them, they could skip my whole post.

Actually, I have the opposite feeling -- I would really like to know how the thing is going to end up, at least some of the way, so I canstop wondering as I pass through it, and enjoy the journey more. I realize that it's a quirk of mine, though.