<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>jonathanspence.com</title>
	<link>http://www.jonathanspence.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 23:39:19 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>You Can&#8217;t Go Back</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/86</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/86#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 23:39:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		
	<category>TV</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/86</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With the recent ending of some of my favorite shows, and seasons ending for others, I have been thinking a lot about the state of television storytelling. I think one of the main problems that a lot of shows that go on for more than a season or two have is that they can&#8217;t go [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With the recent ending of some of my favorite shows, and seasons ending for others, I have been thinking a lot about the state of television storytelling. I think one of the main problems that a lot of shows that go on for more than a season or two have is that they can&#8217;t go back to where they started.</p>
<p>Most good shows start at a slow pace, take their time introducing who the characters are and their motivations, and then build to an important, but not too complicated climax at the end of season one. They hit the ground running in season two, and since the climax at the end of season one wasn&#8217;t too huge, they can play out the majority of season two much the same as the first season. There usually haven&#8217;t been any huge earth shattering events yet, and the characters are still much the same as they were in the beginning, just better, since the producers, writers, and actors are all in the groove. There is a big climax, usually with something dramatic, sad, and story altering. This is a good thing, and it&#8217;s the reason we watch good TV. Examples of this progression are <em>Buffy</em>, <em>Veronica Mars</em> and <em>Alias</em>, although most arc driven shows have the same issues, if not on exactly the same timetable. The problem comes with how to deal with this in the third season and beyond. There has been drama, betrayal, and possibly death, so how do you go back to the slower lighthearted pace of the beginning, that made the show great? The answer is, you can&#8217;t, at least not in the same way with the same characters. It&#8217;s just the nature of good drama to get darker as it progresses. Characters mature, get emotional scars, and change, they are damaged. Even if they were already damaged at the beginning of the show, this is different, because we saw the damage happen and it changes how we look at them.  The story as a whole is usually darker and more serious too, it&#8217;s difficult to go on like normal when the world was almost destroyed, someone important died, or some other season finale level event happened. This is where shows usually start losing some fans, because they don&#8217;t like the new tone, or their favorite character took a turn they didn&#8217;t like.<br />
There a few different directions a show can take at this point. Some shows like <em>Buffy</em> just crank everything up another notch and use the same cycle again, just bigger and better. Others, like Alias try the reboot option where they push everything off the table and put some of it back, just in different places to try and re-create the feel of earlier seasons. Other dial everything back, and hope nobody notices. This is the first big test of a good show, because it can break even the best of shows, since <em>something</em> <em>has</em> to change. The first option can work for a season or two, <em>Buffy</em> pulled it off flawlessly for season three. Rebooting has a very hit and miss record, <em>The O.C.</em> effectively rebooted for season four, and got it&#8217;s best season, far better than two and three. On the other hand, after a very successful reboot in the middle of season two, <em>Alias</em> started rebooting like a computer with a bad video driver, to the point you had no idea who was a bad guy from week to week. <em>Smallville</em> takes the award for just dialing it down. Something earth shattering would happen, then there would be a lot of amnesia, and everybody would go back to business as usual, it&#8217;s a horrible way to run a show. It also makes for a boring show, because characters tend to stay the same and not change.</p>
<p>Once a show pulls off one of the transitions, it&#8217;s not free and clear, because they have to do it again next season. I can&#8217;t think of a show that didn&#8217;t flounder for at least one major transition, or get canceled before they had the chance to. <em>Buffy</em>, and <em>Angel</em> after it got dark, really dark. Season four of <em>Angel</em> is probably the darkest season of TV I have seen. What used to be a humorous drama turned into a dark drama, and lost a lot of what made it great. The same thing happened in season six of <em>Buffy, </em>and while they were both still great shows, they weren&#8217;t the same as they were. In their last seasons, they both tried a reboot, to try and get back to where they started and it kind of worked, for a while, but you just can&#8217;t rollback the damage you have done to characters.</p>
<p>So, what should a show do to stay great throughout it&#8217;s run? I think there are three things.</p>
<p>One, they need to have their main story arc and character arcs planned out, at least to the point of knowing what will happen to who in what part of what season. Without this planning, pacing always suffers, witness <em>Battlestar Galactica</em>. It&#8217;s also critical that the character arcs are planned so that one character doesn&#8217;t get used up and have to be thrown away unintentionally. This happened in <em>Angel</em> to Cordelia, and in <em>The O.C.</em> to Marissa. I don&#8217;t think there was a plan to do what they did to those characters, they just realized one day that to move the show forward, they had to go. That <em>was</em> the right choice in both cases, but it should have never gotten to that point. Overall arc planning can even bring a mediocre show up to greatness. Look at <em>Babylon 5</em>, the acting was mediocre, the dialog was passable, the production quality was just above cheesy, but the overall arc made it far better than the sum of it&#8217;s parts. The best example of modern arc planning is <em>Veronica Mars</em> in seasons one and two, almost every detail and throwaway character ended up having a purpose, and produced two of the most solid seasons of TV ever made.</p>
<p>Two, a newer method that seems to be gaining in popularity is time compression. The story of season three of <em>Battlestar Galactica</em> started three years after season two ended. If <em>Veronica Mars</em> is renewed for a fourth season it will jump four years into the future. <em>Alias</em> was the first in recent memory to do it in one of it&#8217;s reboots, and had great potential even though they wasted it. It&#8217;s a way to reboot the show in a believable way, and get rid of a lot of the darkness and tension that builds up. Jump ahead a few years and characters will have healed some, situations will have changed, and you can get back some of that feel the earlier seasons had. I hope we see more of it, since it&#8217;s a better way to have things get back to a slower pace than contriving strange plot turns, or having characters act contrary to normal human behavior.</p>
<p>Third, change up the main characters. New characters or promoted secondary characters can bring new life to a show. New characters means you can spend more time on character development, where you already used up most everything for the main characters. New characters also means that you can break love triangles and other relationships that are stuck in a rut. I can&#8217;t count the number of show that have characters with on/off/on/off relationships far past the point where normal people would have moved on. This is usually the easiest way to create some easy drama, but it gets old really quickly. Kill someone off, or make them leave, and bring in some new people. <em>The O.C.</em> was getting really stale until the casting changes that happened at the beginning of the fourth season. Buffy was also good with this, as Joss is probably the creator most willing to kill off main characters and bring new people in, almost always to good effect.</p>
<p>The point of this whole thing is, shows can&#8217;t go back to where they started, so they need to have a plan for where they are going to go, and they need to not get caught off guard like so many shows seem to do. TV is still an evolving art form, so I have no doubt we will keep getting better TV as more writers and producers start realizing what works, and what doesn&#8217;t.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/86/feed/</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Back in Houston</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/84</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/84#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2007 22:47:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		
	<category>Musings</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/84</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I seem to have a lot in my head to write about lately, so I will once again attempt to post here regularly. In November I decided that ten years in East Texas was enough and none of the reasons I had for staying were valid anymore, so I moved back to Houston. So far, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I seem to have a lot in my head to write about lately, so I will once again attempt to post here regularly. In November I decided that ten years in East Texas was enough and none of the reasons I had for staying were valid anymore, so I moved back to Houston. So far, I love it. The only thing I miss is <a href="http://www.texasbob.com/eats/tbe_fuglers.html">Fugler&#8217;s</a>, since despite being the eating out capital of the world, with over 9000 restaurants of all kinds, I can&#8217;t find a place with a <em>good</em> hamburger. There are plenty of places with passable ones, but nothing even comes close to Fugler&#8217;s so far. It&#8217;s mind boggling considering that Houston is geographically in East Texas even if culturally it might as well be LA, and there is no good reason why a Fugler&#8217;s quality place shouldn&#8217;t be here somewhere.</p>
<p>I always have people look at me like I&#8217;m crazy when I say it&#8217;s much faster to get around in Houston than back in Marshall or Henderson. As long as It&#8217;s not rush hour, or construction, I can get from where I live at 290 and the Beltway to the Galleria area in less than fifteen minutes. Back in East Texas, it took forty five minutes to get to a decent restaurant, and even then there were only a few to choose from. I think people just get zoned out when they are driving on rural highways and don&#8217;t realize how much time they are wasting regularly just to get to the store.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/84/feed/</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Media Integrity Script 1.1</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/82</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/82#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2006 15:49:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		
	<category>Software</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/82</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have updated my Media Integrity script to version 1.1. This is a small update, but it makes it a lot more functional if you have a very large tree of files you are validating. When preforming a verify operation the script will now prompt whether you want to repair the repairable files unless you [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have updated my <a href="http://www.jonathanspence.com/software/mediaintegrity">Media Integrity</a> script to version 1.1. This is a small update, but it makes it a lot more functional if you have a very large tree of files you are validating. When preforming a verify operation the script will now prompt whether you want to repair the repairable files unless you specify the -n flag.<a onmousedown="selectLink(81);" id="p81" href="http://www.jonathanspence.com/wp-content/uploads/MediaIntegrity_v1-1.zip"><br />
</a><a onmousedown="selectLink(81);" id="p81" href="http://www.jonathanspence.com/wp-content/uploads/MediaIntegrity_v1-1.zip"> </a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/82/feed/</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DS Lite Loose Screen Fix</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/80</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/80#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jun 2006 21:17:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		
	<category>Musings</category>
	<category>Games</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/80</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For any of you having the issue with the bottom screen moving around a little, I have figured out how to fix it if you don&#8217;t mind opening your DS. The bottom part of the DS Lite is laid out something like this horribly not to scale diagram:
[&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#124;xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx&#124;&#160;&#160; ]
[&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#124;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;vvv&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#124;&#160;&#160; ]
&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;&#45;&#8211;
[________________________]
The dashes are the circuit board, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For any of you having the issue with the bottom screen moving around a little, I have figured out how to fix it if you don&#8217;t mind opening your DS. The bottom part of the DS Lite is laid out something like this horribly not to scale diagram:<br />
<code>[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;|xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx|&nbsp;&nbsp; ]<br />
[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;|&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;vvv&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;|&nbsp;&nbsp; ]<br />
&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;-&#45;&#45;&#45;&#8211;<br />
[________________________]</code><br />
The dashes are the circuit board, and the &#8220;x&#8221;s are the screen. The &#8220;v&#8221;s are some tiny resistors that are the only thing that sticks out from the board where the screen is. There is a thin foam pad all along the back of the screen, but the screen appears to just sit loose in it&#8217;s place. What ends up happening is the screen rocks back and forth over the resistors. Why they designed it this way I have no idea, the only thing I can think of is that the actual production models have thinner foam or something, and once they found there was a problem it was too late to change it. I have noticed the same issue with the demo Lites at my Best Buy, but it is much less pronounced than on my import.</p>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t seem to impact functionality at all, but it&#8217;s the kind of thing that gets into my head and won&#8217;t let go, so I decided to fix it. I ended up making two pads of paper to slip in on either side of the resistors to brace the screen, and it works perfectly. I don&#8217;t have any movement at all now and everything still works.</p>
<p>Taking it apart is not too hard as long as you are careful and have a small enough tri-wing screwdriver. There are five screws on the outside, two on the left, two under the little rubber pads, and one in slot 1. There are two inside the battery compartment, one in the upper right and one in the very bottom right. The one in the center of the compartment is unnecessary to remove to take off the case. After you remove all of those, you can take off the case, be careful of the power and volume sliders that are loose. You should probably then carefully remove the shoulder buttons, they have a little spring that is likely to fly off somewhere when you are messing with the rest if you don&#8217;t. After that there are just two obvious screws that secure the circuit board to the front of the case. You can&#8217;t remove the circuit board easily, or even move it very much, but you can pry it up enough to see what&#8217;s going on and put something in there to stop the movement.</p>
<p>I wouldn&#8217;t do this unless you are really comfortable taking stuff like this apart and it really bugs you, but if you are the kind of person who already has a tri-wing screwdriver it&#8217;s pretty easy. Compared to installing an afterburner in the original GBA it&#8217;s very easy.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/80/feed/</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Media Integrity Script</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/79</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/79#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jun 2006 21:46:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		
	<category>Software</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/79</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just uploaded my media integrity checking script into the software section. It can automatically create and verify par2 files in nested directories of files. I use it to make sure that my mp3s don&#8217;t get corrupted, and that some errant program (iTunes for example) doesn&#8217;t mess with my tagging. I have been using it [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just uploaded my <a href="/software/mediaintegrity">media integrity checking script</a> into the software section. It can automatically create and verify par2 files in nested directories of files. I use it to make sure that my mp3s don&#8217;t get corrupted, and that some errant program (iTunes for example) doesn&#8217;t mess with my tagging. I have been using it for a few days and it works well. I will probably add some kind of logging to file so that I can schedule it to run after my nightly backups.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRSS>http://www.jonathanspence.com/archives/79/feed/</wfw:commentRSS>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
