Who’s Your Maker?
February 24, 2012 in Southern Vampire Mysteries
In the lead up to her March appearance at the Mystery Writers of America’s SleuthFest in Florida, Charlaine Harris has given an intriguing interview to the Orlando Sentinel.
For reasons that probably don’t need to be raked over any more than they have already, we quit posting about True Blood on the main site here last September. As a fan of the books first and foremost, my appetite for watching the central themes and characterisations of the books torn up, set on fire and ceremonially pissed upon is simply not voracious enough to continue covering it season after season. Not while Alan Ball and his merry band of shock jocks repeatedly spit in the faces of fans who love the essence and spirit of the characters Charlaine Harris created.
For months now, book readers have expressed frustration at Charlaine’s general silence on issues surrounding the way Ball has handled her material – but in particular, the absolute desecration of Sookie that has never been more evident than it was in the certified clusterfuck that was Season 4.
If I could inject that hysterical hot mess of a season with five shots of Valium, strap it down to a gurney, and sign it into a bricked up institution that would guarantee me I’d never have to see it again – I would. I would do it in a fucking heartbeat.
But you know what? A quick perusal of this interview tells me we’re not the only ones who think a line has been crossed, and that this…
…Should mean SOMETHING.
For those of us who have been reading her interviews for a while, a distinct change in tone would be apparent in this one.
“I am the Creator”.
“I don’t write Anna Paquin – I write Sookie Stackhouse”.
The Sookie Stackhouse novels were selling well before the TV show.”
“Sookie…is growing, changing, She’s very strong. She’s a girl girl. She’d be OK on her own without a guy. She’d like to have a relationship. It’s not necessary to her happiness.”
“The [True Blood] story is very different from my story. It was never a Bill vs. Eric situation in my mind.”
Do you think she might feel a little disenchanted with Ball’s vision? Perhaps a bit annoyed at how angry, dependent and flaky True Blood Sookie is being portrayed? Or maybe just a little pissed off that Sookie’s story – the story of a woman finding her own feet in a supernatural world – has been reduced to little more than a romantic rivalry between two vampires who were NEVER, EVER intended to be equals in any universe, either real or imagined?
It’s not my place to judge Ms Harris for how she chooses to handle these things. Yet to a book fan, her oft-repeated references to Alan Ball’s “genius” have become increasingly grating over the years – as they’ve marched right alongside a bewildering, steadfast refusal to stand up and take ownership of this story and its characters as the products of her own imagination, first and foremost. I have no issue with Harris’ respect for the Ball’s vision, if that’s what flicks her Bic. I have no issue at all. But I’ve never understood why the superlatives for Ball were always the end of the sentence, or why she’s been so reluctant to follow them up with at least some claim of her own.
Harris wrote a series that has made the NYT best seller lists every single year since the release of Dead to the World in 2004 – long before she had the marketing monolith that is HBO behind her. That’s no small feat, and she has earned her stripes in publishing, just as Ball has earned his in film and television.
It’s high time Charlaine stood up and reclaimed these characters, because they are hers. It’s high time she made statements that clearly delineate between her books as the original, and Ball’s work as an interpretation, because that’s what it says in the fucking credits. I’m glad to see her doing both of these things in this interview – she’s been selling herself short alongside Ball for too long. The fans of her books – the readers who love them for what they are irrespective of HBO’s shock and awe treatment – need to hear her openly and unapologetically defend what is creatively and rightfully hers.
I sincerely hope this new found confidence represents a long overdue line in the sand. Charlaine has obviously profited from True Blood and like many authors, that has come only after relinquishing creative control. But that shouldn’t mean she has to smile and pretend to like it when her protagonist is reduced to a walking, talking, all-screwing contradiction; and her character arcs are swapped around like keys at a swinger’s party – with about as much regard for the long term consequences.
Read the full interview here, and let us know what you think in the comments.
Brilliant.
I may not be able to be as eloquent as some of the other posters on this site but you hit it out of the park again with your points. I’ve always had a bone of contention with the words “based on” in the credits.
Reading between the lines, you get a sense that CH is just as frustrated with the series as we all are. I think she’s even more frustrated because her work is being bastardized in such a way that it should no longer carry the title card “Based on the Sookie Stackhouse novels…” It should read “Inspired by the SVM novels then shit on by Alan Ball.”
The following quotes, I think they are the same as the ones you’ve pulled into your article, really hit the nail on the head. I don’t think she is able to come right out and say what she feels but her opinion is being known.
“The Sookie Stackhouse novels were selling well before the TV show, but the TV show led to a lot more exposure and readers.” Meaning: I didn’t need them but they needed me.
“They [the actors] are wonderful, but the story is very different from my story. It was never a Bill vs. Eric situation in my mind.” Meaning: Bill? I was going to kill that mofo.
“I don’t write Anna Paquin, I write Sookie Stackhouse…She’s growing, changing, She’s very strong. She’s a girl girl. She’d be OK on her own without a guy. She’d like to have a relationship. It’s not necessary to her happiness.” Meaning: Anna is portraying Sookie like a weak willed, child who wants to be the centre of attention yet needs to have all men worship her.
“Certainly I’ve had thoughts about that. I’m very fond of Alan. I think he’s a genius. He’s made good decisions for television. He’s not consciously trying to imitate the books. That would be boring for him and boring for me. If I knew what was going to happen, why would I watch? Viewers and readers are getting two experiences.” Meaning: He sucks donkey balls.
“I am the creator. When I’m on the set they call me the Maker. But he’s the creator of that world visually, no doubt about it. It all came from his brain and his talent for hiring the right people for the right jobs.” Meaning: This is my intellectual property but I’ve signed my rights away and he’s gone and done nothing but fuck it up. Maybe I shouldn’t have signed all rights away.
She said it in this article and she has said it before, almost to the point where I’ve felt it’s annoying, that the money is huge from this and she likes making money. She’s not going to rock the boat with HBO too far because who’s to say that one of her other novels won’t be optioned. If she has a good, reciprocal and pre-exsisting relationship with a production company, even if HBO or Alan Ball didn’t want another one of her series, then other companies would look on her as easy to work with and profitable. It’s a big WIN in her column.
I hope that she starts to open her mouth a bit more, she is kind of snarky and I love it, as the series, book and television, winds down. Burn some bridge Charlaine! We want to hear what you’ve really got to say!
EDIT: I meant to say Sookie needs to have the centre of attention but wants all the guys to leave her alone. Bitch is manipulative. It reminds me of my bff from high school. She never wanted to date any of the guys that hung around her but would freak if they started showing a lack of interest. She’d start flirting with him to reel them back in yet push them away again.
When did you ever see Sookie flirt with anyone on the show?
She is kinda snarky, if you read between the lines and it’s awesome. I love it – I wish I was able to express myself with such subtlety.
And I like your point – as the series starts to wind down, we may well hear more about what she really thinks.
THIS CAN ONLY BE A GOOD THING
CH started saying the money was “huge” after Season One. It became the only thing she COULD say as the reason why she could be “happy” with the crap fest TB quickly became. As a starving novelist myself, I can sympathize with any novelist who is making any kind of money—much less “big” money—not wanting to p*ss on the guy who made the big money possible.
At this point, AB couldn’t turn around the TrueTanic even if he wanted to, given the Yesmen/WannabeWriters he’s stuck Nancy Oliver with, unless he hired CH herself to fill in the giant plot hole he’s dug for her characters.
You nailed it! Great post!
This interview was like a due cold shower, or if you prefer- a slap in the face. “Someone’s” face.
TB Sookie is SO not even close to book Sookie!
“But that shouldn’t mean she has to smile and pretend to like it when her protagonist is reduced to a walking, talking, all-screwing contradiction; and her character arcs are swapped around like keys at a swinger’s party – with about as much regard for the long term consequences.”
THIS. I was so pleased to read this interview last night. I was really proud of Charlaine for so deftly managing to make her point.
Great post SVB
Oops! “So” deftly…..Pardon me. My respect for CH’s sugar-coated balls of steel got in the way of proofing for typos
Thanks SVB! I agree…I definitely see a definite change in her answers. And I LOVE it!
After what AB did to Sookie…I’m glad to see her finally step up and defend the character SHE created!
While it annoys me that she always talks about the money she’s earned from this…blah, blah, blah. I can understand that. She’s proud of the fact that she’s successful in the career she chose…but we get it. We know all of them make more money than we do. She doesn’t have to keep repeating it.
If CH is as upset about it as this interview reveals her to be…then that means that if CH spoke out more about it to AB…then maybe he’ll listen to her? And it would help bring some of the fans back to watching the show. And most of us won’t be disappointed?
Forgot to say…how much I LOVE a snarky CH!!
I love people who are snarky…maybe because I am too…but I’m glad to see her come out in this interview. I was honestly cheering when I read this! LOL
While it annoys me that she always talks about the money she’s earned from this…blah, blah, blah. I can understand that. She’s proud of the fact that she’s successful in the career she chose…but we get it. We know all of them make more money than we do. She doesn’t have to keep repeating it.
Yeah, it’s getting on my nerves too. We get it. You’re rich, you’ve made a boat load of cash, now shut up about it before you look ridiculous.
I think her point is that is the only reason she can find to be happy about it. In other words it’s a thinly veiled insult to AB’s craptastic work. She goes by that if-you-can’t-say-anything-nice-don’t-say-anything-at-all rule that so permeates the south. She’s also pretty much bound (more than likely contractually obligated)not to say anything too nasty about HBO, at least until the series ends (hopefully sooner rather than later).
And just why was season 1 hands down the best season?!?!? Because it followed the book almost to the “T”. Great points as always! Thank you for remaining loyal to a gifted author.
I thought her saying “I don’t write for Anna Paquin” was VERY telling. Even though she did go on again with the bit of ‘if it was the same, who would watch?’ Um, millions of Harry Potter and Twilight fans kinda blow that shit out of the water. LOL
But I am with the poster above. I can’t wait for her to BURN THE BRIDGES!
Her comment about knowing how it would send since Book Two hopefully will be a wake up call for the delusional Bill fans. LOL
[quote]Even though she did go on again with the bit of ‘if it was the same, who would watch?’ Um, millions of Harry Potter and Twilight fans kinda blow that shit out of the water.[/quote]
That’s it right there. Both those film franchises were direct adaptations. Scene by scene and even line by line, were lifted straight from the pages and I think, someone could correct me, those films did ok.
Same goes for Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead (from what I’ve heard, haven’t read the novels) and The Hunger Games (I CAN’T WAIT!). People WANT to watch what they’ve read, that’s why the make a film or a television series from it. We’ve all got it in our heads but want to see it with our eyes. No shame in recreating the book exactly for the screen. They did it with season 1, albeit a few changes, and it was the best.
do not forget the triloly The Lord of the Rings, and The Hobbit being filmed now
I’m getting tired of that line about people not watching if it was the same because, as Devon says, people WANT to see the story played out as it was in the books. If you base a story on books, you should follow the books in all main respects. Every single event doesn’t have to be the same, but when you’re basing a movie or TV show on books, the characters, particularly the main characters, should be as close to the book characters as possible, and the main events should basically be portrayed as they are in the books. Think Gone With the Wind, Pride and Prejudice, Persuasion, as well as the shows others have mentioned. I’m sure I could name many others but I’m in a rush and don’t have time right now.
I think that line about “people not being interested if the show were exactly like the books” is some sort of pr spin or the official party line, if you will. Too many involved in True Blood have repeated it for it not to be suspect- from Charlaine to Alan Ball to writers and the cast. And as several have pointed out – it’s a ridiculpus premise.
I agree with you that the main characters in particular should not be messed with and that is exactly what Ball is attempting to do. Can you imagine the uproar if Peter Jackson had made the Lord of the Rings the story of Boromir’s quest to take the ring to Mordor? Or if in some adaptation of Pride and Prejudice a writer or director switched Darcy and Wickham?
“Can you imagine the uproar if Peter Jackson had made the Lord of the Rings the story of Boromir’s quest to take the ring to Mordor? ”
*shudder*
I don’t think you can make your point any better than this.
AB started this “who would watch” BS at the get-go and the Billiacs picked it up immediately as one of the only rationales for the wholesale ream job done on the Eric and Bill of the SVM.
I’d happily retire from posting if the word “genius” was never used to describe Alan Ball ever again, by anyone.
William Inge (“Splendor in the Grass”) was a screenwriting genius. Robert E. Sherwood (“The Best Years of our Lives”) was a screenwriting genius. Alan Ball is no screenwriting genius. He’s not even the best screenwriter working in TV (both Aaron Sorkin and Matthew Weiner are head-and-shoulders about either AB or Nancy Oliver). He had a couple of good seasons on Six Feet Under and an Oscar for American Beauty as ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY, not for an adaptation. Big, big difference in how a writer treats an adaptation and one who creates his own material.
I thought this was such a great interview. And kudos to the Orlando Sentinel. The writer actually seemed to have read the books and had given thought to the show vs books debate.
“The [True Blood] story is very different from my story. It was never a Bill vs. Eric situation in my mind.” Can I say how much I LOVED this comment?! There is no triangle in the books. Sookie’s relationship with Eric develops separately and apart from her relationship with Bill, which ended of its own accord. The Eric vs Bill (and going forward, perhaps Alcide as well) dynamic is a True Blood and HBO marketing construct designed to generate buzz and draw viewers. They purposefully milk this situation for all its worth – spend anytime following the True Blood Facebook page should you need proof.
As to the worries about her comments that “Alan Ball is a genius” and it would be boring if they did a direct interpretation of the books, I think these are her tried and true publishing cliches. Like Tim Robbins’ character in Bull Durham, she’s saying she’s just trying to be there for the team, hoping to help out the ball club. She has to say this stuff. It is a paycheck after all. She’s touting the party line – in fact, it’s the same two things Charlaine says over and over again in interviews when asked about True Blood. It’s the other stuff she said in this interview, the stuff she hasn’t said in the past, that really matters.
[...] you would like to read the rest of what SVB wrote, please click here! Trust me…you won’t regret it, because she feels the same way we [...]
She is obviously stating that SVM and TB have become two separate things that only share character names (and I love her for it).
I love the books, and was sad to see what AB has done to them after season 2. I stopped watching the show like I used to (I’m barely able to watch an entire episode, I just fast forward to “interesting” bits).
This is my favorite part of the interview:
*****
Are you happy with the decisions “True Blood” executive producer Alan Ball has made?
Certainly I’ve had thoughts about that. I’m very fond of Alan. I think he’s a genius. He’s made good decisions for television. He’s not consciously trying to imitate the books. That would be boring for him and boring for me. If I knew what was going to happen, why would I watch? Viewers and readers are getting two experiences.
I have to say that I completely agree with you! I fell in love with the Stackhouse Novels a long time before I heard about True Blood.
I feel like the Sookie in the books was so much stronger and better than the Sookie in the show. The Sookie from the books was able to make up her mind and saver herself when she needed to. She never relied on Bill or Eric and wizened up whenever she needed to. The Sookie from the show is just so strange and weak to me.
I have only watched season 1 of True Blood and then just read summaries and clips of the rest of the season simply because the changes were to much for me and I hated. I’re really disappointed in the show. I wish it hadn’t deviated from the books so much. I think a lot of people wouldn’t have minded that you would know what would happen just by reading the books. I think they would be happy with seeing their vision from the books enacted in real life.
Well, I probably don’t make to much sense, I’m not very articulate but that’s just my opinion.
True Blood Sookie is just obsessed with Bill, because AB loves the character so much, that is one of the most annoyingt things of the show… at least book Sookie is stronger and doesn’t behave like a doormat and she certainly didn’t ask Bill for forgiveness, which was just so damn ridicolous on TB.
TB Sook asks TB Bill for forgiveness because Alan Ball is a Buddhist, and TB is all about AB’s world view. Per Wikipedia,”in Buddhism, forgiveness is seen as a practice to prevent harmful thoughts from causing havoc on one’s mental well-being.”
Also per Wikipedia, “Alan Ball has, in numerous interviews, discussed his Buddhist faith and how it has influenced his film making.” AB says he wants to bring to the mainstream a discussion of Buddhist teachings. Why not have TB Sook throw one of the cornerstones of Buddhist belief out there, whether it make sense or not?
It’s pointless to try to true up SVM character motivations in the TB context, just as it’s pointless to try to parse the meaning of symbols and coincidences that AB himself admitted were just randomly thrown into episodes on the chance he could make them relevant at some later date.
If AB had licensed some other southern paranormal mystery series, the three main characters would be named Bucksnort, Derwood,and Clem, but they’d be doing the same things in TB that Sook, Bill, and Eric are. That’s just the way AB rolls.
Oh Lord, the buddhist overtones were so unsubtly splattered ALL OVER ep 12, it just added to the sense of WTF! permeating every single scene…
Sometimes I think maybe I was too harsh on those 4/5 final episode of season 4, they can’t be as bad as I remember. Nope, they really are.
TB Sookie asked Bill for forgiveness because she lied to him. Sookie was raised as a Christian and was taught that lying is wrong. Just because Bill hurt her doesn’t mean that she has a right to hurt him back or that she is not accountable for her actions if she does hurt him. “Turn the other cheek” and “judge not lest you yourself be judged” are the most fundamental teachings of Christianity.
ah at last, the mind that brought us the REAL Sookie Stackhouse. I so do admire this woman. And boy am I glad to read her subtle biting back at the mess that is TB.
“I don’t write Anna Paquin – I write Sookie Stackhouse”. Amen to that! That right there is the unforgiving difference between the Real Sookie and the whiny,annoying,weak TB Sookie. Millions of women read the book and admire sookie and want to be like her, millions of women watch the show and wonder when the fuck TB Sookie will grow up and grow a pair.
Thank you SVB for a GREAT post! LOVE IT! Could not agree with you more. and so so happy to see CH standing up for her brilliant work!
“Millions of women read the book and admire sookie and want to be like her, millions of women watch the show and wonder when the fuck TB Sookie will grow up and grow a pair.”
Word ZNB – and there is the real travesty of TB. When TV punters don’t care what happens to the main character, its a FAIL of gigantuan proportions
Thanks SVB – excellent post.
“I am the Creator ” – DAMN STRAIGHT!
Love that ‘on set’ they call her “Maker” and it’s CH’s new handle at her site. LOL!
I am hoping for full disclosure from CH about TB once the books and show end.
CH is the quintessential southern lady – tongue firmly in cheek. She won’t say anything unprofessional publicly, but I think that privately she has more than her share of WTF?? moments in the show – like the rest of us.
Alan Ball and his team of writer’s not only don’t do Sookie justice on True Blood, but they also write all the women on the show to be so much less than the strong,complex, and highly rooted for characters that CH created.
It’s not a good thing if you aren’t rooting for the heroine of the story and find her to be flaky and annoying.
Whereas with Book Sookie – she’s my girl
I love Charlaine books and i love True Blood too . It is exciting enough to keep you on the edge of your seat . My favorite in the books and show is Eric . Alexander is very talented i wish him nothing but the best in his career if it`s on TB or in films Season 1 was the only season that went towards the books more i agree with you all . if other shows can do it why can`t them . I will not stop watching the show i love it As love as Alex is on it . i will still buy the books because i am a loyal fan of that as well
Love it SVB! Really great interview, much more direct than she’s been in years. And like someone said above, burn some bridges Charlaine!!
Ok, I’m lazy so I’ll just copy what I wrote on the forum.
“How has Sookie changed over time? Is she more fun write these days?
I don’t write Anna Paquin, I write Sookie Stackhouse. Sookie is always a lot of fun to write. She’s growing, changing, She’s very strong. She’s a girl girl. She’d be OK on her own without a guy. She’d like to have a relationship. It’s not necessary to her happiness.”
LOL it’s like she’s making a stab at TB Sookie, she doesn’t grow and change, she’s weak, she’s not ok without a guy, she needs to have a relationship and it’s definitely necessary to her happiness. Yeah CH does pay attention
“I don’t write Anna Paquin – I write Sookie Stackhouse”.
In her lovely Southern way, she’s saying Anna isn’t Sookie, and reminding everyone she *is* the authority on Sookie. We aren’t the only ones who’ve noticed what TB has done to the series. It also has to gall her a little that Anna’s called it the “story of Sookie’s sexual awakening” (*barf*) and had a hand in the the disaster that was last season. Now, apparently, they’re letting actors write the story. Whatever.
I also don’t begrudge her the money she’s making. She’s struggled to make money writing for a long, long time. She deserves it and I think the series is worth every dollar I’ve paid
If she really wanted to rake in the bucks, she could sell us a chapter a month, and make a lot more, lol!
oh Lord! I really did try blocking that out of my mind! I can not believe she said it was the story of Sookies sexual awakening!!! what was she drinking!!?? A piece of advice AP, if you have no idea what the original matter is about DON’T SAY ANYTHING and end up sounding like a complete bimbo who wouldn’t know a strong female lead if she kicked you in the shins!
oops I meant “don’t say anything instead of sounding like..” not end up sounding like.
TB Sookie is just a plot device to express Ball’s obsession with Bill.
I agree about the money thing KCScout. This is her job, and TB has helped to make her financially successful in a way beyond what she probably dreamed was possible. I think she would also view not saying that as coming across as ungrateful.
You would have thought that AB would have gotten a clue that, after Season 1 (which was the season that was most directly adapted from the books) that the awards started to dry up. They got Golden Globes and other awards, as I recall for Season 1 –and I think for Season 2, Episode 9, which is far and above my favorite. But award nominations have eluded that show for over two seasons now….. AB should get a clue.
I’ve also noticed that there has not been much fanfare about the actors or the show during the offseason, nor during the start-up of Season 5. Aren’t we usually teased with trailers or still pictures from the set by now? I wonder if HBO’s enthusiasm for the show reflects that of the fans….
Pat
oh, so this is what all the wank on tumblr was about! people who are taking SVB out of context, claiming that SVB is pulling quotes from the interview out of context. it’s like a ball of clusterfuck, getting larger and larger.
i enjoyed the interview very much. i would love to see Charlaine speak more freely. praps one day…!
Great Post SVB. I love this interview and I love this quote in particular!
“I don’t write Anna Paquin – I write Sookie Stackhouse”.
Hee!
I also love the Bill v Eric quote. Hahahahahahaha. It’s the one specific thing that I believe ruined the show! There are so many more things I could site, but if THIS hadn’t been created in the show, it would be so much more interesting.
Back to my 8th reading of Club Dead. Now that I’m passed most of the Bill stuff I’m enjoying the books so much more. Thanks AB for ruining my enjoyment of Book Bill.
I really enjoyed this interview … two things my favorite
1. Not writing Anna P but Sookie – it’s now official that TB Sookie is worlds apart from the book Sookie …
2. Bill vs Eric situation was never in her mind – well halleluja to that!
I understand that she has to defend the thing about adaptation of her work and not following the books – it would be boring, blah, blah – but I am sure that at this point she is going ‘wtf’ have they done in her head.
It will be always so hard for me to get over the fact that they didn’t give us a pleasure to watch the original material on the screen… especially as it had been done so successfully for other books/shows … such a great shame…
I am really glad that we are feeling a different vibe from CH – it’s about f time
Changes are acceptable as long as the essence of the story and the characters is not changed.
This whole article made me smile; ESPECIALLY the “I don’t write Anna Paquin, I write Sookie Stackhouse” and the “Sookie would be fine without a man” comments. It was as if she was taking back her character.
If the show was truly paying tribute to the spirit of the books, it would be centered on the journey of a strong, resourceful, and funny heroine. Instead the female lead is treated as nothing more than a supernatural boy toy caught between two vampires, a shifter, a were and whatever shirtless supe-du-jour is the flavor of the moment. Meanwhile, as a viewer, I find myself echoing Steve Newlin, “Honestly, what do they see in you?”
For me, there will always be disappointment that the show could have been so much more than what it was. However, thanks to the wonderful book series Ms. Harris has created, it is pretty easy to leave the show behind.
When I first read this interview, my first thought was “Wow, she certainly changed her tune a bit” and I could not have been happier to hear her say such things. My favorite part was ”They [the actors] are wonderful, but the story is very different from my story. It was never a Bill vs. Eric situation in my mind.” this is CH stating a triangle was never really in her mind, EVER!
My other favorite was “I don’t write Anna Paquin, I write Sookie Stackhouse. Sookie is always a lot of fun to write. She’s growing, changing, She’s very strong. She’s a girl girl. She’d be OK on her own without a guy. She’d like to have a relationship. It’s not necessary to her happiness.” In my opinion, she is stating that she does not like the way Sookie is on the show. I don’t think this means Anna is a bad actor, just that she is not Sookie. I think Anna could be Sookie, if they wrote her better (like she is in the books) and if she had read the source material. She just does not fully get Sookie’s motivations so really they are writing for Anna in a way.
Charlaine is such a snarky person and we all see that in Sookie. In the interview, she stated that someone said ‘ she reminds them of their Aunt and the interviewer asked her if that was a compliment and she said “I don’t know, I don’t know their Aunt”! That was such a Sookie thing to say! <3
I love every delicious word in this interview, especially;
“I don’t write Anna Paquin. I write Sookie Stackhouse”
And we love you for it, Charlaine!
– this coming from CH after a very painful writeup about DR in Entertainment Weekly. It did not deserve to make the worst books list in any compacity.
I think True Blood spillage is partially responsible for that undeserved and overly harsh critique.
True Blood’s poison pen has leaked into all facets of the Sookieverse.
Sookie is unrecognizable on True Blood and I cannot for the life of me find much sympathy for her character as it stands. After reading that Anna Paquin thinks Sookie’s journey is about “Sexual awakening” all I can do is shake my head, turn the TV off, and read some really terrific books by their original “Maker.”
True Blood is not popcorn for smart people.
Popcorn is a food with very little nutrition, but with water it can trick your stomach into feeling full.
I think we’re all past the shock value and gratuitous sex scenes and just want a good story told that makes sense.
“True Blood is not popcorn for smart people. Popcorn is a food with very little nutrition, but with water it can trick your stomach into feeling full. I think we’re all past the shock value and gratuitous sex scenes and just want a good story told that makes sense.”
THIS. seriously, THIS.
it sounds more like Charlaine Harris is sick and tired of getting asked about and compared to True Blood. Personally I don’t see her unsatisfied with the show, I see it more like her being annoyed with the boring/unoriginal questions and lazy journalists.
and about that Bill v Eric thing: it’s not the first time she says people read her books differently to how she writes them. I’m pretty sure that there was team Bill and team Eric way before True Blood. AB just didn’t hide it.
Bill is extremely boring and uninteresting in the books, really often when you see bill fans on charlaines facebook page for example, they have a paquin moyer picture, so really obvious that lots of them are just into him because they are not able to separate the actors who are married in real live from the character on the show and the books…
Of course there were Bill fans and Eric fans before TB. But I think it’s a little too simple to say that Alan Ball just “didn’t hide it”. In fact, they exploit it, heighten it, milk it for all it’s worth. Why? Because it generates buzz. As long as they keep Bill fans, Eric fans, Sam fans, and Alcide fans on the hook, well then we’ll all watch, right? More ratings means more money.
Unfortunately the way to keep all these viewers on the hook is to use Sookie as a big juicy bone for all these supes to salivate and fight over, reducing her to a walking, talking plot device. Which is too bad, IMO, since book Sookie is such a great heroine.
Great post SVB. When I came across this story on the interwebs last night I couldn’t wait for you to get your teeth stuck into it.
I am so heartened by this interview from CH. I felt, even though she’s been incredibly circumspect in previous interviews, that she was not happy with AB’s overall vision as its been played out over the last 4 seasons. She’s obviously tried her best to use even-toned ambiguity to ensure she doesn’t appear to be crapping on AB’s petunias or feeding the whole team wars stuff. Too bad AB has reciprocated that respect in his translation of the SSM’s into TB.
So happy to hear her state that its not about suitor wars; its about Sookie, her journey, her choices, her growth.
And for me I see only two scenearios for the end of Sookie’s story; a) she has her (albeit untraditional) HEA with Eric, b) Sookie ends up unattached. No Sam HEA, because thats a compromise I can’t believe in, with what we’ve had established in the series so far. Either a) or b) scenario is fine as long as CH is true to Sookie’s established characterisation. Obviously the romantic in me wants her to stay with the Viking, but if she doesn’t, I have to believe CH will give us a damn good reason why. I want what’s best for Sookie. From this interview, I believe CH does as well.
Dammit, that should read, ‘AB hasn’t reciprocated that respect in his translation of the SSM’s into TB’.
Amen CH! It’s about time – I say! This really made my day. In her charming Southern way she managed to hit on EVERY damn point! I really have to admire how clever she is and am so happy she’s standing up for herself & her story.
“I am the creator. When I’m on the set they call me the Maker.”
AS THEY SHOULD!
Thank you for sharing this. You made the end of what’s been a pretty good day that much better. I have to read through everything. I just can’t imagine how she must feel about Sookie. I would be devastated.
Moral of the story — Alan Ball must never be allowed to create stories inspired or based on a strong female character. He destroyed the TB Sookie. So sad.
I suspect we will soon see that every show AB oversees turns into a show about AB. “Banshee” is supposedly about a small Amish town with an ex-con posing as a murdered sheriff (already greenlit be Cinemax, HBO’s sexy sibling). It’s going to be “fun” to see how AB turns it into a show about AB’s issues (the “tyranny” of organized religion, the destructiveness of intolerance, “Jungian philosophy,” blah blah blah).
CH is in the difficult position of being contractually obligated to promote each new book while having every single interview/appearance turn into, “So, about True Blood….” Going into Year Five, that’s got to get old for anyone. Originally it wasn’t so bad, when everyone was all, “It must be thrilling to have a genius like AB choose your little story….” but it’s clear now that for the rest of the life of the SVM, the one and only topic is whether CH is going to continue to defend AB at every stop on her tour. She has the unenviable choice of either being AB’s publicist, which makes her look ridiculous as TB gets worse and worse, or his biggest critic, which makes her look both unprofessional and ungrateful. She’s the Jennifer Aniston of popular fiction, having to either discuss Brad Pitt and look pitiful or refuse to discuss him and look vengeful.
I go back to how much of an influence Anne Rice is on CH and how Rice’s bad-mouthing of Tom Cruise before Interview with a Vampire has never been forgotten. No wonder CH is looking forward to winding up the SVM.
All the BS AB has slung has been proved 100 percent wrong by Game of Thrones and Hunger Games, and book fans of other series, like Kim Harrison’s Rachel Morgan paranormals, about to be turned into a CW series in the fall, now use “TB” as a negative verb (as in “I hope these books aren’t TB’ed by the showrunners.”
Spawning a new negative verb is AB’s real claim to fame (that, and casting Alex).
SVB, congratulations to cutting loose from TB here on the blog. The TB showrunners don’t need the free publicity provided by SVM fans on blogs such as Sookieverse, don’t appreciate it, and don’t take it into account in their decision-making.
I should have added this link for anyone who wants to see what the Kim Harrison fans said last October (primarily), when the CW “Hollows” series was announced, about their fears about having their favorite book series turned into a TB:
http://kimharrison.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/the-hollows-on-tv/
One quote: “While I started out being okay with the adaptation of True Blood, I came to hatehatehate it for the horrible morass that HBO made of Harris’s fabulous fictional world. I know, I know, she doesn’t seem to care what they’ve done, but I do.”
I don’t know what show you are all watching–probably the Bill Compton hour if you think that he has anything to do with any of Sookie’s decisions in S4. The break-up scene in S4 finale is not about Sookie choosing between Bill and Eric (as if there could ever be a choice between a manipulative, abusive, delusional misogynist and someone actually capable of genuine love, loyalty, and devotion). Listen to what Sookie actually says: “It’s like being ripped in half. No matter what I do, someone I love gets hurt.” She doesn’t say “no matter who I choose, someone I love gets hurt.” Bill of course thinks that this is about him because he’s an idiot and thinks the universe revolves around him. He decides that he’s so important that he’s standing in the way of Sookie’s happiness and must now make a fake grandiose gesture with a papal blessing, no less, to make sure that Sookie and Eric both appreciate that he is making a noble heroic sacrifice to step aside. Eric is confused and all emotional and unfortunately takes his cue from Bill and says absolutely the WRONG THING, just like Bill. At this point Sookie realizes that he has no clue what she wants from him and gets upset at him. Sookie gives Bill one final chance to acknowledge and apologize for his abusive treatment of her, and when he doesn’t take it, she dismisses him once and for all. Then she tries to be honest with Eric and explain that while she loves him, what he’s offering is not enough. Why? Because he callously dismissed her fears about her friends getting blown up at the Moon Goddess Emporium, just like Bill, marched on Moon Emporium with rocket launchers, just like Bill, and didn’t even think to negotiate for the release of all humans Marnie was holding hostage when he was offering his life for Sookie’s, just like Bill. Eric was just as insensitive to Sookie’s concerns about her LOVED ONES as Bill! The choice that Sookie was making in the S4 finale was between hurting Eric by not being with him and putting her loved ones in danger by being with him because Sookie’s involvement with vampires has brought nothing but danger to her and her friends and family. She saw very clearly in S10-12 that while Eric will protect her and will give up his life for her, he won’t lift a finger to help anyone else that she cares about. And that’s not enough for Sookie. She is NOT the kind of person who would put her personal happiness above the lives of her friends and family. That’s why Sookie broke up with Eric in S4 finale.
anyone here is talking about what “means” the breaking of the triangle of hell.
Here it has to do with the differences between the books and the show at a crucial point:
“The [True Blood] story is very different from my story. It was NEVER a Bill vs. Eric situation in my mind.”
is not even about one or the other, is about SOOKIE.
That’s a very interesting internal monologue you’re attributing to Sookie. Shame I didn’t see even a shadow of evidence for this in that scene/episodes. If it’s supposed to be subtext, it must be really freaking well hidden, because I couldn’t find it even after repeated viewings, nor did I ever read this interpretation in other forums/blogs/reviews.
Maybe we’re all wrong and AB’s popcorn is too smart for most of us LOL!
Look at Sookie’s facial expression in E10 when Eric says to her to about Bill “Lovable, isn’t he?” She gives him a really vicious look like the one she gave the Rattray guy in E1 when he called her “nuttier than a bedbug.” Eric was incredibly insensitive and hypocritical to say something like that about Bill when he basically just said that Tara, who Sookie thinks of as her sister, and the other humans deserved to be blown up because they picked the wrong team. Clearly this wasn’t something she wanted to hear from Eric. In fact, I would say that Sookie could consider this a betrayal–something that Eric swore he would never do. Sookie is loyal to people she loves. Look at what she was willing to do for Bill in S3. Eric didn’t respect Sookie’s concerns about Tara because it wasn’t about him. Eric wants Sookie to be about him, the way Pam is all about him, but Sookie’s world is bigger than Pam’s. She cares about other people, not just Eric. The heart-ripping and taunting act didn’t help Eric’s cause as well. It was vicious, and he did it after Bill promised not to harm the other humans, so it was treacherous. Sookie totally called Eric on it. She called him vicious and untrustworthy in the break-up scene in S4 finale. Eric has goodness in him and can love deeply, but until he starts really listening to Sookie and respecting her other relationships, Sookie will not want to be with him. (This is also something that bothers Sookie in the books.)
But Eric said that SARCASTICALLY, meaning “look, this is the guy you love,see what a gentleman he is?”
Where’s the “betrayal” in that?? You may call that petty maybe, but he wasn’t belittling Sookie’s concerns about her friends, he was pointing out that BIll was.
About the rest, seriously, NOTHING about that final scene will ever make sense to me, not only because of the scene in itself, but because imho the whole stupid triangle was handled horribly throughout the season, effectively destroying what little sympathy for Sookie I had left and any interest in her love life past and future.
I’m genuinely happy for you if you still find it believable and compelling but I just don’t, not intellectually and even less on an emotional level. So we better leave it here because our views are clearly inconciliable.
Oh Please, Bill said he would kill all the witch, even if kills all human in process, including one who was a Sookie’s friend, in a dumbass move. Bill totally discarded the Sookie’s feelings. she left very upset with Bill. is THIS that Eric was pointing in his comment.
Oh, and the reason Bill and Eric are wearing matching bathrobes in the S4 finale is not to make them social, moral, or intellectual equals, but to convey to the audience that when it comes to understanding Sookie Stackhouse’s real needs and concerns, they are EQUALLY WITHOUT A CLUE.
Miscommunication, particularly between Sookie and Eric, is a common motif in the books. It seems to be a common motif for True Blood as well as there is a huge miscommunication between the show and the audience. TB didn’t go downhill after S1. It just became more subtle in its messages. Most of what’s really going on in the show goes right over people’s heads because a large portion of the audience watch it only for tits and butts.
Not sure I understand your point about most of what is going on going right over people’s heads. The ratings are still huge. The “large portion of the audience” you reference is happy as the proverbial clam. It’s only those who post on entertainment blogs (such as Eonline, Vulture.com, and Gawker.com), TV critics (such as those who write for the Washington Post, etc.), and those who have spent years studying the mythology and symbolism of TB (see the HBO Talk boards, for one place) who are almost universally disappointed, having decided there is no “there” there.
And if your point about TB becoming “more subtle” were on target, don’t you think Ms. Harris might point that out in her numerous interviews—that the show has brought great subtlety and nuance to her characters?
Perhaps you might point us to such a comment by CH.
Rina, the plots were bad in S4. The case simply is not the show deteriorating in popular opinion around here because some people don’t like the way relationships ended, -it’s the entire package. Bill bringing vampires into a fight with a necromancer at midnight in the middle of a grave yard? UNBELIEVABLY STUPID. Too stupid for even Bill, and certainly not subtle. That was bad writing, clearly, and it was consistently bad last season.
Then again I only ever went to Zoolander’s school to learn how to read me good.
LOLOLOL!!!
No, it’s not bad writing. That’s Bill Compton. He’s not a strategist. He has never fought a war against witches before and that was the only idea he could come up with at the spur of the moment.
Just to comment on the matching bathrobes thing. My interpretation of that is that having a bunch of matching bathrobes around comes with the job of King vamp on TB. In season 3, Lorena and Eric wore matching bathrobes with Russell’s monogram on them, but they weren’t in the same scene together, so they weren’t so glaringly noticeable, I suppose. Beyond that, I am completely done attributing big symbolic deeper meanings to anything on TrueBlood, because, even if AB is trying to make big statements about this or that, I no longer care.
It took me awhile to realize that the books are better than the series. I bought into the “AB is a genius” stuff because of Six Feet Under. However, it is painfully obvious that AB never really wanted to tell CH’s story. It was more like he wanted to tell his own fan-fic version and could afford to do it on a large scale. Soooo….I am glad that CH is finally sort-of speaking up. I hope she continues to do so. Money only goes so far in making up for someone trashing your creation.
SVB, Great Post! Thanks so much for sharing your POV. Only you could find a way to get me excited about May for the next book. After last summer’s craptovision my love for anything SVM was catapulted into a dark place. Her assertion that she is “the creator” shows me that she is ready to reclaim HER story.
It’s so annoying to see Sookie be “the girl who can’t commit” on TB, because in the books Sookie does fiercely commit, even if she changes her mind. But I have to admit, I didn’t get the ending of DR. I kind of felt like Bubba – it was fun, and I was glad to be included, but most of the time I couldn’t figure out what everybody was talking about. It’s also disappointing that it sounds like CH could title the 13th book “Dead Tired.”
I loved that post SVB! That was a great interview, and it’s wonderful to see CH step up and make her claim. I’m about to start (another) series reread, in order to get ready for the next installment. I’ll try to not let TBitis taint my enjoyment. Anyone got some extra brain bleach?
BTW did anyone read that AB is stepping down from writing, and will only stay on as executive producer? Thoughts?
Thought #1: Is it too late for someone to write the “Bill goes to Peru” episode?
HAHA, DH87, no doubt! HOWEVER…one thing I’ve learned with this show, especially after last season, is to be careful what one wishes for. Sure, they can write Bill Goes to Peru; and it’ll most likely turn into a full blown storyline about how King Beehl is galavanting all over South America trying to find himself and pining for his Sookeh. It will include plenty of subplots, non essential characters made up for the show who suck up valuable time, gaping plot holes, and appearances by Eric, Sookie, and various weres/shifters. Yeah…no thanks. I’m totally burned out on AB’s fanfic.
I’ve had my suspicions that CH may feel the same way, and they’re strengthened by the interview (thanks, SVB). If any good comes out of this mess at all, I hope it’s a cautionary tale on how NOT to adapt works of fiction.
Well, make that fanfic from the writers, in case he is stepping down. Honestly, I don’t think it matters at this point, the show is too far gone. I think it will always bear his stamp, unfortunately.
I make peace with the show when I separate the show from the books….I am a fan of the books…love all 11 books…the show is only something else to watch.
Well stated SVB and thanks for the heads up about the interview ( I read it and it cleared the air –almost ). If our girl Sookie can be “saucy” then Charlaine Hunter can be just as ” spunky “, she the original thought. I was quite disillusioned since TB last season and took a few months off from visiting this site and revisiting many fresh wounded comments of TB shortcomings. I had no idea of conceptual change here to forego or spearheading discussions. I felt like it took me a while to get over the funeral.
Thank you SVB for saying what we all feel. I read the interview and I say it’s about time CH stands up for her books and the clusterfuck that AB has turned them in to. Devon said it best with these few words about the credits ” It should read “Inspired by the SVM novels then shit on by Alan Ball.” No truer words have ever been wrote when describing seasons 2-4.
As someone who has read the books and has watched the TV series, I have to voice the opposing opinion – that the book version of Sookie is somewhat weak and has a bit of a superiority complex. Don’t get me wrong, I did enjoy the book series at the beginning, but as the books have gone on, my view of Sookie has become sullied (as can be seen on my blog). I know I’ll probably get crucified for saying this, but I just wanted to throw out another point of view. I believe that the TV show has improved on certain characters (come on, don’t you love that Lafayette is still on the show??), and I believe Sookie is one of them. Like I said, this is just my point of view, and I’d love to know that we can all agree to disagree. I’m not saying this to stir anything up, but I know I can’t be the only one to think this way!
Cheers, and thanks for the entertaining read!
BookSookie has her share of flaws and can be rather frustrating, as real people often are. But that’s the crux of the problem for me: while she feels like a REAL person, TBSookie is just a walking plot device with a few character traits thrown in there and then not treated with any consistence/depth or given space to grow organically.
As such, I can’t even really hate or dislike the Sookie on the show, I’m just completely detached from her and unable to relate to her at any level.
That’s exactly how the people of Bon Temps feel about Sookie.
I don’t think TB has improved *any* characters who existed in the books and they’ve failed in some way in all the ones who did. Lafayette is the author’s creation, and if he hadn’t died early in the series maybe you’d have some kind of argument that TB Lafayette is better than Book Lafayette. I’ll give you TB’s Jason as better but, again, Jason didn’t have that much storyline in the books (and I flove Ryan Kwantan). Frankie too and maybe Russell (except for the giant plot holes). Still, the main characters in the books are Sookie, Eric and Pam, and they’ve all been character-assasinated beyond recognition. TB Sookie is stupid, weak-minded and whiny – I can’t stand her.
Mindful that SVB said she didn’t want to rehash AB’s failings on this post(which I’ve been doing) but to concentrate on CH’s new “attitude,” I would ask if anyone thinks this “new CH” may be in response to the anti-TB vitriol on CH’s FB page and elsewhere? CH has prohibited TB talk on her own site but she can’t do that on FB.
I think at this point she can’t possibly be insulated from the backlash – even though, as you say discussion of the show has long been banned on her own site, she interacts with fans via many other avenues. Facebook, book signings, and fan Q & A interviews like the one she did with the Washington Post a few months back would have to provide a strong counterpoint to the extremely insular conversation on her forum.
A lot of people whinge that what she reads on her own site (ie. the same 5 people talking around in circles basically) determines her views about what fans think of her books and True Blood but I disagree with that. I think she interacts with fans outside the confines of her site enough that she simply MUST know what people are thinking and feeling.
The timing of this (with Ball stepping down this weekend) has me wondering though, I must say.
I wouldn’t be surprised to hear CH backslide when she’s promo-ing TB in June. In the face of TB’s continued ratings juggernaut, she’d sound ungrateful.
I find it hard to envision fans, media bloggers lobbing softball questions, or tv “critics,” having the cojones to broach the subject. I didn’t use my (brief) time with her to say, “Hello, you must think TB is terrible compared to your books.” Not only would it be very bad manners, but it would also be futile, since no agreement, if she voiced it, could ever be truly off the record.
CH’s publicist, who’s monitoring everything, may have the thankless task of reading all the “TB is crap” stuff. Telling a valued author (gently) that the crap is blowing backward is how publicists earn their keep.
The “same-five-devotees” problem seems to be affecting a number of TB–related blogs/websites, too. If CH took the gloves off, though, all bets would be off—and, dang, it would be a lot of fun.
SVB, since you brought up AB’s departure from TB daily oversight (and he’s apparently left the door open to leaving completely) . . . I’ve predicted for months that Alex will leave the show after Season 6 wraps up filming late next spring (those 7 year contracts aren’t for 7 seasons, but 7 YEARS), and that if that were to happen, AB would bail. The show is nothing without Alex, and Ball knows it: he’d never go down with an Alex-less Truetanic.
You heard it here first.
Just because we’re only hearing now about his stepping down, doesn’t mean it hasn’t been in the works for a while. Checking writing/directing credits for S5, it appears his only contribution is a writing credit for Episode 6.
Curious creature that I am, I’d love to be a fly on the wall at HBO.
Thank you for this post SVB. It is wonderful to hear CH stake her claim as the creator of Sookie Stackhouse and her world and to make it clear, albeit in a somehow both snarky, but still respectful way, that Anna Paquin is definitely not Sookie Stackhouse and that the story AB is telling is not at all the story that CH is telling. I love how she described Sookie as a character; that’s the character that I root for, not the imposter with her name who runs around in AB’s fanfic.
Little by little, she’s almost at the point of saying “True Blood is a fucking disaster.” Nothing wrong with spitting out the truth.
A-FREAKIN’-MEN!