The 'Real Life' Concept

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

Fiction is fun, there's little argument there. Whatever you're looking for, you can find, and a lot of people, even non-nerds, find themselves debating characters from their favourite series with other people who watch it.

And this is where the problems begin.

A quick look into Tv Tropes 'Headscratchers' page will reveal the same problem recurring again and again, ask anyone ten years ago what they think of Ross and Rachel being on abreak and the same problem rears its ugly head, I just finished reading an old article on this very site about Batman (Batmanalysed for anyone who's interested) and it's entire central concept was rooted in this problem.

I call it the 'Real Life' concept, that of judging fictional characters by real life standards when it suits you, but by the standards of their universe when it doesn't.

Some examples:

Spoiler

Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory: Sheldon's fandom would make him out to be some sort of uber-special God-Child put upon by those less intelligent than him, jealous of his genius. His friends Leonard, Raj and Howard occasionally pull pranks on him which lead to a modicum of stress, usually forgotten by the next episode. What his fans don't want you to talk about is the behaviours Sheldon exhibits which drive them to these pranks. Waking them at two in the morning because he wants to talk about comic books, making them take a train instead of a plane whenever they travel, routinely 'unfriending' them in real life because they do something he disapproves of. Sheldon is most likely an autistic, and living with him and tolerating him on a daily basis would be a nightmare. Sure the audience sees him for twenty minutes when he makes some nice sardonic comments and solves problems but I would defy any of them to live with him on a day to day basis for longer than a month.

Spoiler

Ross and Rachel: Were they on a break? Judging by real world standards, Rachel acted extremely immaturely in their relationship. When Ross suggested they take a break to cool down from an argument and return to it when they were calmer, to sort out their grievances like adults, her response was the teenage 'I think we should break up over this one problem.' This doesn't let Ross off entirely though, because he still went and slept with someone the very night he broke up with Rachel. I could write an essay deconstructing this both in universe and out of universe but really the gist is that within and out of the show pretty much everyone sticks up for Rachel and villifies Ross. As I hope I've shown though, this is six of one and half a dozen of the other.

Spoiler

Batman: According to the article I just read, along with ther literature about Batman, there are several problems. Firstly, his presence is the cause of the multiple supervillains. Secondly, he's a borderline sociopath celibate hero whose rather creepy war against crime takes away a lot of his humanity. Thirdly, he never uses his influence as Bruce to shut down bad Wall Street trading, or overseas slave labour. Answering each one:

1. This is just wrong. Harvey Dent in the comics had underlying psychological problems, exacerbated by having acid thrown in his face. Batman had nothing to do with the acid being thrown in his face and nothing to do with his psyche. Poison Ivy was nowhere near Gotham when she was transformed, and whenever her origin is described it has nothing to do with Bruce or Batman. Catwoman was a burglar before Bruce even became Batman, Clayface was an actor who went mad, Mister Freeze wanted to save his wife, Ra's has been a criminal for hundreds of years. There are over a hundred Batman villains, of whom about four can be directly linked to him, Joker, Riddler, Bane and Hush.

2. Initially his war on crime leaves little time for romance, but also, he's in love with Catwoman, but neither of them are able to express it, it's a fairly simple answer. Also, it's not true anyway since he was sleeping with Jezebel Jet for months.

3. Also just plain wrong. He's used Wayne Enterprises influence to stop all sorts of white collar crime, it's just not as exciting watching Lucius Fox and Bruce Wayne fill in paperwork as it is watching Batman bring down the mob. Batman Forever and, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight were all able to get this right, so why can't critics?

So those are my three examples. For discussion value:

Do you alternatively judge some characters by 'real life' standards and others by their fictional world view?
Do you have other examples you can think of where you don't think people should apply the double standard?
Do you disagree with my examples?

(Just trying to stir up as much discussion as possible, you don't have to stick to my questions, just the gist of the topic really.

 

[the spud]

I try not to hold anything to the standards of "real life". I don't care what this place is like, I just want the artist to make his own choices not constrained by the limitations of realism.

 

[Avaholic03]

The only time I hold a fictional character to "real life" standards is if the universe they exist in is so poorly constructed that I wouldn't know how they are judged there. I wish I could think of an example, but I'm drawing a blank right now.

In the cases you mentioned, those characters and their nuances are well enough defined that they just seem appropriate for the world they live in. Therefore, it doesn't make sense to judge them by "real world" logic.

At least, that's my thought process.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

I get annoyed by Sheldon. The whole idea of his character is simply retarded.

As smart a person as he is, understanding human interaction and playing the role shouldn't be too difficult.

He's clearly not just focused in one area of research. He understands tons of things that he doesn't enjoy. Human interaction isn't that complicated a subject and week or two of reading some up to date psychology books and he'd be able to pass himself off as a human being.

thats the evidence for him having aspergers. my mother thinks his character is meant to have some form of it, and she works with people who have aspergers daily.
OT: you make an interesting point, but with Friends you should be able to apply some real-world standards to it, it is about friends not superman.

Spoiler: Words about the idiocy of Friends...

and rachel is immature in other situations: when monica asks her to move out she says 'why dont you' even though the lease is in monica's family name, not rachels... the thing they actually break up over (rachel acting as if there isnt a problem, despite the fact that she hasnt seen ross in weeks and when he tried to be a boyfriend she gets pissed off)... the only ones who deal with problems well on that show are joey and pheobe.

 

[MikailCaboose]

Well with Touhou, it kind of comes down to which fan interpretation of the character we're going around. Though usually on the basis of the game simply because...Well how many times can you have a real life conversation about real life umbrella monsters?

 

[TheHappySquid]

Just to say I'm 100% on Ross's side. Yes it was the same night, but Rachael's message was quite clear.

 

[Nickolai77]

I have a vague sense of what your going on about, but:

I suppose what matters is context- what sort of medium is it and what's the setting? If the character's set in some sort of, say, splatterhouse action/gore film then you'd expect characters to be larger than life, a bit flashy and a bit cheesy, because it's fit's in with the context of the film. Let's say however you are writing a more serious novel- like war and peace say, then you are going to make the characters more serious, more "realistic" and attune to the context of the story.

 

[kaiiboraka]

As far as your description of Sheldon goes... actually, I'm just going to quote Wikipedia for a second:

"Sheldon is characterized as having an overtly intellectual personality: he exhibits a strict adherence to routine, a tenuous understanding of irony, sarcasm and humor, a vocal admiration for his superior intellect, and a general lack of humility or empathy. These characteristics provide the bulk of his character's humor and the center of some episodes. He has been described as the show's breakout character.Reviewers and fans have speculated that Sheldon's personality traits are consistent with a diagnosis of Asperger syndrome and/or obsessive-compulsive personality disorder."

My main point is that last sentence. You mentioned autism, and Asperger's syndrome is part of the autism spectrum, however it's not autism in itself. Anyways, you say it's unrealistic that the other characters would be able to stand him for very long, correct? I do have Asperger's syndrome, and I've always loved Sheldon as a character. It's a bit exaggerated for sake of comedy, but most of what he does isn't too far off the mark. I find him to be highly relatable in a number of ways. He gets obsessive over things, is really picky, doesn't like to give up on something once he's started, he's arrogant, he avoids eye contact a lot, can't stand when things aren't how they usually are/how they're supposed to be, obsessive-compulsive qualities, etc., etc. Living with someone that has Asperger's syndrome would definitely be annoying, difficult, and sometimes even problematic, but it's not totally unrealistic. Again, it is a show, so it's a tad bit exaggerated. However, he's hilarious, and that's really all anyone ever cares about.

 

[CrystalShadow]

I get annoyed by Sheldon. The whole idea of his character is simply retarded.

As smart a person as he is, understanding human interaction and playing the role shouldn't be too difficult.

He's clearly not just focused in one area of research. He understands tons of things that he doesn't enjoy. Human interaction isn't that complicated a subject and week or two of reading some up to date psychology books and he'd be able to pass himself off as a human being.

thats the evidence for him having aspergers. my mother thinks his character is meant to have some form of it, and she works with people who have aspergers daily.

If he had aspergers, atleast to the degree where he would be unable to form meaningful relationships. Then he wouldn't be so diverse in his knowledge. People with aspergers tend to be fanatical about very few things. Very focused on them. Sheldon has his major interests, but he also picks up things that he has no interest in at all. Such as American Football. The ins and outs of religions and ancient social structures.

He would be able to observe an analyse human interaction without much difficulty at all.

Clearly the creators based part of his behaviour on that of someone with aspergers. Like he social awkwardness and ritualistic behaviour. But he has other traits that stand at odds with that.

He's just a poorly thought out extreme of nerd culture. A living strawman I suppose.

Rhaj is probably more of a candidate for someone with AS. He's got selective mutism around women, I suppose other than that he's pretty normal though.

I think the creators didn't put much thought into the back grounds, they just made extremes that seemed humerus.

Are you sure you're not overstating aspergers here? People keep suggesting I have aspergers, and sure I have a lot of obsessions, but they're by no means exclusive.

For that matter, another person I know that has a definite diagnosis of aspergers (I have one too, but it seems a little flaky in how it was handled) doesn't come across the way you are describing...