Saturday, October 31, 2009

Please Don't Kill Bill, Charlaine!

Well, here the rumor pops up again, this time from Alan Ball's comment at the Paley event the other night ( I took this photo in Houston last January at a Charlaine event)

He said something like " I know in the book world that Charlaine had to be talked out of killing Bill in the last book but I’m saying in our world Sookie and Bill have a connection that will not die"
in response to a question.

Charlaine responds on her message boards:

duckpond100 2009-10-29 18:31

I understand that Alan was commenting on the differences between the future of the series and the plot of the books at Paleyfest, and remarked that I’d been “talked out of” killing Bill. That’s leaving an inaccurate impression with many readers, my moderators have told me.

Unfortunately, in a conversation with Alan some months ago I did tell him that when I was finishing DEAD AND GONE I did consider the possibility that Bill might die in the fairy assault on the field hospital. I did not realize that Alan might remember and repeat my words. During the course of the Sookie series, I’ve considered killing off several characters who haven’t bitten the dust yet and may never. That’s one of the choices a fiction writer considers with every book. And you’ll notice that in the end, I decided that Bill had more story to tell.

So please don’t give Alan’s words any more weight than they’re due, or blow them out of proportion. It never occurred to me that he might repeat a casual remark of mine about a possibility that never came to pass.

Charlaine Harris

10 comments:

Rita said...

I think Alan should not have said
any thing about that comment at all.
JMO.

SnapandPrint said...

Seriously, it's Charlaine's character and her creation (the world in the books). She can kill off any character at any time and doesn't have to please everyone all the time.

I seriously dislike when an author keeps a character alive just to please fans. It makes the writing and story suffer when the author starts writing to please the public and not to further the story along.

I am not saying she should kill Bill...just that she shouldn't feel she cannot do something in the story just because of pressure from a group of readers.

It's her world, she created it, and she can do whatever she wants with it to further the story.

N said...

I do often read some interviews about CH. One that comes to mind is a response she gave to this question:
Q. Do you have a good idea of how the series will eventually end? If so -- have you ever changed your mind about the ending?

A. I do know how the series will end. And I have never changed my mind.

Contrary to this

In this controversial topic she was talked out of killing Bill. Well who would her talked her out into changing her ideas?
AB is under scrutiny with the show being so popularity; no wonder whatever he says could blow out proportion.

Sharon said...

While both CH and AB have their rights to their own creative muses, both of them probably have to keep in mind that the fans are what make it possible for them to keep working. Not that either of them is in danger, but it could be bad to totally ignore your fans.

For example, after the last 3 episodes of season 2, the TB boards on HBO were howling at how they disliked those 3 episodes, at least in the main. I know of another author, not CH, whom I've read criticisms about the direction her works have taken and seen so many fans who have sworn off her. I have become frustrated with her myself, but have not given up yet.

Bottom line, if you are in a business that depends on fans, you can't constantly blow crap in their faces. Nor should you give in to every thing the fans want. You'd never get anything right that way. But it doesn't hurt to keep your finger on the fans pulse.

KathyG said...

Charlaine has a right to do what ever she wants in her books. Regardless of what fans would like. They're her characters and stories. I've read all of her series now and she has killed off characters and switched up couples and all of them have made perfect sense in the story she was telling. If she kills of Bill or Eric or Quinn or Sam, she will have a reason, it will make sense and the story will continue. Do I love Eric? Yes, I do and I would be really sad, but I would trust Charlaine to couple Sookie with someone that she properly convinces me Sookie should be with.

The difference between complaining about the the show and the books is that those that love the books would like the spine of the story and the personality of the characters to stay. The series is supposed to be based on the books, not inspired by.

I'm discouraged to know that something is fixed in the show. Talk about NO SURPRISES! If AB is going to continue the shmoopy twins and deny the natural attraction Sookie has to other men it will be dull indeed. He's making it a big romance. The books are detective stories with a little romance. I find this grand passion forever love really boring. And poor show Sookie, never to know another man. Never to know if Bill really is the one because she hasn't had any other experience what-so-ever.

Alan Ball contradicts himself at every turn (have to change book story because there would be no surprises, but Bill and Sookie will remain in the end, so no surprise there). I find him totally annoying.

JWhitney said...

I think it's tremendously unfortunate that Alan Ball said what he said, because it would seem that now we know CH is not planning to put Sookie with Bill as Sookie's final choice. Otherwise, how could she have even considered Bill as expendable? Basically, AB has just semi-spoiled the biggest happening of CH's book series, namely, who is Sookie going to end up with.

As to AB's comments on Bill & Sookie having a connection that never dies, IMO, anyone who takes that comment to mean Bill and Sookie will end up together is taking AB's comment too far.

Even in the books, it's obvious that Bill and Sookie have a connection that never dies, I mean, he's always around, she thinks of him alot, he helped save her from the bad fairies, and so on. But to take that connection and say it means they're going to be together romantically off into the sunset is a huge leap.

Regardless, I should think AB knows what he's doing when he makes sentences like that. He's feeding the Bill fans' fantasies that Bill and Sookie will end up together, which seems a wee bit manipulative to me considering that he most likely doesn't know yet who Sookie will end up with.

I know that when you're writing fiction, the story sort of takes on a life of its own. You might think it's going to go a certain way, but when you start putting it on paper, things don't always lean that way and you have to make changes to accommodate the natural story.

Sharon said...

"The series is supposed to be based on the books, not inspired by."

KathyG, I agree. It seems to move further and further from the books. It's like he took the names of the characters, and sort of what they were, and not much more. The basic line of Rene killing those women was pretty true to the books, and they do go to Dallas in the second book. But the maenad story was just awful, no disrespect to the actress intended.

One of the big changes he made that I felt was to the detriment of the story was when Sookie was gored by the bull/maenad. In the books, four vampires drained most of her blood: Bill, Eric, Pam and Chow, so that it would not put too much poison in them. It also gave Eric an excuse to have taken Sookie's blood. Then she was given the transfusion of human blood that Eric procured. I thought it a great scene.

Instead, we get Dr. Ludwig torturing Sookie's back. Lots of gore, but since it was poison in her, the first solution was more sensible. But gore and screaming seems to be the order of the day for the tv series.

But I'm sticking with it and AB has the right to change anything he darn well wants since CH gave up all her rights to the stories. So Sookie could very easily wind up with Bill for the rest of the series. Color me not shocked, which a sort of beige.

" Dallas " said...

I'm enjoying your discussions and appreciate the civil disagreements and discussions on this OH-SO very delicate topic

Anonymous said...

I also feel that discussion about what Charlaine chooses to do with her own characters is not the point.

The point, and the reason Ball's comments have caused such uproar, is that he has basically eliminated a major suitor which ruins this aspect of the book series for readers.

We are now left with Sam as the only real competition for Eric, and there is a pretty strong argument to be made that he isn't really in the running either.

What is incredibly disappointing to me is the fact that Charlaine has gone to such lengths to keep her readers guessing for SO long - and and he has all but destroyed that with one comment.

I do not accept for one second that it was an accidental remark - he doesn't make mistakes like that in a room full of rabid fans.

I'm so annoyed about this, really, *really* annoyed LOL.

Sharon said...

I don't know if you've all read the books or not so I'll be careful with my wording, but should their circumstances change, there are a couple of past suitors who could come back into Sookie's good graces. And CH could always write in a new man. I love her being with Eric, but I've pretty much decided that Sookie won't end up with a vampire since she does not want to become one so badly. And I certainly don't think Sam is out of the running. He could wind up being the default lover.

Even if CH killed off Bill, which I doubt she would do, AB will never kill him off.