After much soul searching, I found I was changing my character for external reasons, rather than for the demands of the story. And I also discovered that, in doing so, I run the risk of destroying what made the the character and the story work in the first place — Edwin’s unique Edwin-ness.
To be a little clearer, people like the podcast because it’s fresh and original. But if I take a piece of feedback like, “He’s really not an active enough character for a TV series” and change him, well, I just lose what made him interesting to begin with.
And he’s plenty active. He’s plenty a lot of things. And what your insightful comments have helped me see is that my job is to make it good. If some TV exec doesn’t see how it fits into television, or some movie guy doesn’t see how the third act works, well, they just don’t.
And some of these people know things I don’t. But unless they have “, Creator” after their name, I’m going assume their difficulties with anything I write are precisely that – their difficulties.
To do anything else is to throw my sanity and whatever generative power I have into a swirling abyss of entertainment industry pimpery. And you guys really helped me learn that. Thanks.
Patrick,
Yeah, her last name was “Frapdraggle” in The Less Than Sinister… and “Plantaginate” in 2.0.
Didn’t mean to nitpick
–
M
Good call, buddy. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, but … I was kinda running out, if you know what I mean.
For a view into what happens when you get sucked into that abyss, you should check out Rob Long’s ‘cast, “Martini Shot,” such as the current issue where he compares the studio exec to Lenny, the “kinda slow” guy in Steinbeck’s “Of Mice And Men.”
http://www.kcrw.com/etc/programs/ma/ma070425development_mouse
Thats right! Don’t compromise your vision for a TV executive- have you seen whats on tv? I’d take Edwin over my Direct TV any day.
Oh yeah. I did change her name. I actually did that on purpose. Windsor and Plantagent are two of the Royal families of England.
I’m glad you found the comments helpful. Interestingly, I didn’t make the Holmes/House connection until I was writing the comment, but I’m glad it helped you put some ideas into focus.
(And yeah, it was nice to hear my name on the podcast.
)
I was too late to comment on the birth of Edwin 2.0, but I’m glad of his early demise.
I was thinking about Edwin’s character after listening to this episode and I’ve got another comparison that might spark some ideas for you.
Edwin is to Topper as Bugs Bunny is to Daffy Duck. Bugs shares Edwin’s unflappable intellectual superiority to his antagonists so there may be some hints there on how to make it work.
Thanks for rethinking the rethinking…of Edwin. Glad you took the chance to explore, and that you took the feedback you got in stride.
My personal lament for Edwin 2.0 was the same that I feel a lot of stories nowadays (movies, comics, tv, internets). Back story. Too much of it, that is. Creators dive into back story before they get you interested in the story (and the characters) at hand.
At its best, it’s an earnest effort to involve the reader/viewer/listener in the story’s development. At its worst, however, it indulges the peeping-tom voyeurism that reality shows have cultivated in viewers and that money-people drool all over. To me, unveiling the back story, whether too much or too soon, sucks out the mystery that makes stories (especially those in serial format) so much fun.
Anyhow, more than anything, I’m glad you put pen to page, voice to mic, and brought us Edwin’s saga. If I may indulge in some back story of my own: I’ve spent spent a bit of time proselytizing “How to Succeed in Evil” since I stumbled across it in the iTunes store a few months back. My biggest success thus far was converting one of my fellow EMTs, whom you honored with a shout out in this episode. VICTORY!!!
Ahem. Anyway, thanks for keeping us in stitches when we’re not giving them out (a bit of poetic license…stitches aren’t in our state protocols). I can’t wait for the next episode.
Aww… you’re my kind of scum too!
Good to hear that we will be hearing your unadulterated voice as Edwin’s again!
I impressed that you went through not only the process of rewriting but reviewed our comments, your spoiling us!
However will be go back to having our shows canceled mid season, shown out of order, not shown the conclusions of to be continueds’ or bumped entirely for the sport!
Also:
I had imagined that any television series of Succeed in Evil would have been animated so that we might hear you there too.
(And you wouldn’t have to contend with an actor who would want to “develop” the character in their own image and to their own ego.)
If the production executives ask; tell them you already have a waiting fan base and that they demand it.
If they still say no tell them God demands it…
… though that is only really something that should be screamed from the street.
I have been listening to Succeed in Evil since it was still hosted on
http://www.theseanachai.com/
and have only written twice to be critical, so I think you are well overdue for a sunshine enema.
I’m also looking forward to buying a copy of that Redneck Expeditionary Force!
Sounds great!
I wasan’t around to comment on 2.0 when It first came out but I am glad to hear you are sticking with the original. That cold calculating laconic demeanor is one of the best parts od Edwins very engaging character. I actualy just started listening to these yesterday, but i’ve heard them all now, and I am an instant fan. (I was linked here by Nodwick comics) This is a very interesting take on superheroes and supervillands, and i’m looking forward to more.
While I did not hate 2.0, I definitely liked 1.0 better.
If I may, I think one thing you did was jumped too far too fast. You spent a bunch of episodes showing how Edwin became a megavillain, then in 1 episode ripped his whole enterprise down. Maybe more tales of Edwin’s insurance company dealing with heroes and villains, teaching them the errors of messing with him? There should be a fair number of stories there before you run out.
Love it all though! Thanks for bringing this to us.
Thanks for killing 2.0, the old Edwin was perfect. Screw the TV guys, your charactors are perfect. However, I have to agree with Master TMO, that their is not enough of Odemnity in action. We only see Edwin take down one Hero (Powerboy) before his whole operation is shut down. You hint at a vast amount of story during its phase of operation, but it was kind of an anti-climax to only see it once. Maybe you could insert chapters between V and IX, huh?
Also (I think I speak for most of the listeners), we’ve had enough of prequals for now. By all means, finish El Justiador, but then GIVE US CHAPTER 13!
Patrick, I’m so glad to see you returning to the original idea and its source. While I certainly hope Edwin & Co. bring you financial success, I am optimistic enough to hope that it won’t be at the expense of your strong, original vision.
Which isn’t to say Edwin 2.0 wasn’t a strong vision. I think it’s a testament to your skill that you could revamp the character so dramatically and come up with something that would still draw a fan base. (A different fan base, but still.)
It’s one thing, after all, for a character to evolve. It’s an entirely different (although common enough) situation for a character to be killed off and resurrected as an entirely different being.
As a fan, thanks for your choice. And good luck!
Just discovered HtSiE today. (Do people call it that?) As someone who just couldn’t wait to hear what Edwin said and did next and loved that he did it with such brute efficiency and scorn, I was appalled to hear that you wanted to change him. Don’t. And as someone said above, too much backstory. Leave Edna and Edwin unrelated.
You have a new fan.
O’Donovan Says:
It’s one thing, after all, for a character to evolve. It’s an entirely different (although common enough) situation for a character to be killed off and resurrected as an entirely different being.
Edwin 2.0 a Professor Moriarty perhaps…
… save it for the second season.
I want to hear about this some place warm!
Edwin 2.0 does seem like someone who could give Original Edwin (OE?) a run for his money, in a very Holmes and Moriarty kind of way. Original Edwin is clearly head and shoulders above all the heroes and villains of the Evilverse, but I get the feeling that Edwin 2.0 might prove a formidable foe, in a purely academic thought experiment kind of way. He is very much the opposite of what makes Original Edwin successful, and yet is successful himself.
Hey, Patrick, I have an idea for a nemesis!
–
M
Thanks a lot for taking the time to read through that bitching and moaning that was the reader’s comments on Edwin 2.0 – and actually taking it in stride. Its got to be hard to create something and take it in a new direction only to have a lot of people say they didn’t like it.
Just like to say that I (and I’m sure other listeners here) really enjoy How to Succeed in Evil and greatly anticipate another episode.
Just a thought; the ‘succeed in evil’ universe seems to be devoid of feminine characters.
So far characters seem to be motivated by self interest / ego, it might be interesting to contrast them with some that are… devoted.
It might be fun to have Edwin deal with “that woman”.
house has autism i didend mind him it was just combind the voce of the first with the new script that wolud be good
http://www.comicbookchallenge.com/
I missed it being worth commenting on 2.0… But I’m really really glad you went back to the origianl.
Being English, hearing the stereotypical Bristish villan makes my skin crawl! i’m so so glad you’re dropping it!
I’m late on really commenting on this. So . . .
Okay, first of all, let me thank you for creating Edwin. He has to be one of the most interesting characters I’ve come along in a long long time, second only to Thomas Lang. (You have to read The Gun Seller, ironically by Hugh Laurie, the guy who plays House).
Edwin is the anti-villain as much as wolverine is the anti-hero. He’s so reluctant about it. And that’s what I love. Making him British was almost like justifying why Edwin was the way he is, sophisticated, clean cut, etc. I’ve not met many American characters like that . . . odd. Also I noticed, he was much more prone to answering Topper’s doubts. But that’s just me
I’ve been listening to this since it first came out, and all I have to say is, you’re doing a great job, and as for Edwin 2.0 (I love the phrase btw) everyone makes mistakes. Yours just helped you realised how much we love Edwin.
I’ve recently started a blog, the information you provide on this site has helped me tremendously. Thank you for all of your time & work.