Sinclair Leaving
marko
contract disputes or because the actual storyline wrote him out on
purpose?
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Why did Sincalir leave after the first season
Here's the announcement jms made:
http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/find/GEnie/jms94-05-15/2497.html
This has never been contradicted by either jms or Michael O'Hare.
> wah it because of
> contract disputes or because the actual storyline wrote him out on
> purpose?
It's a difficult question that there are no 100% clear answers to. What
nobody is disputing is that at the time the show was conceived (in
1986), Sinclair was supposed to be the hero all the way though.
Somewhere between that and the above announcement, Joe decided to have a
second main character take over from Sinclair.
The reasons given for the switch happening at that time were:
* jms finding problems getting Sinclair involved in the season 2 arc
* O'Hare wanting to move back to New York
* The people paying the bills disliking Sinclair and wanting a more
traditional hero in the lead role
Some people choose to emphasize the third one. I believe it was a
combination of all three.
--
Donate free food with a simple click: http://www.thehungersite.com/
Pål Are Nordal
a_b...@bigfoot.com
Theron Fuller
"Pål Are Nordal" <a_b...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:3AA99FF2...@bigfoot.com...
-----------------------------------------------
[GEnie postings by JMS]
I have some news that must be imparted. I think that the best way
to convey that news is to start at the end of the story, make my
way to the middle, and end at the beginning.
So: the end of the story.
Everything is okay. Nothing major really changes. All is well.
_____________________________________________
This was posted somewhere about the middle of season 1. If everything really
was "okay" and "all is well" at that time why does He feel a need to
reassure the viewers of the fact?
And Joe Straczynski really is the master of irony. Further down He informs
the viewers that He's makiing major changes in the plot (to get out of that
dead end He's scripted Himself into) and that He's writing the central
character of the plot out of the series. But with a straight face He writes
"nothing major really changes."
_____________________________________________
Now the middle of the story.
I've been asked, several times, what happens if something *happens*
to me, or one of the cast members, during the five year arc, since
this is a fully-worked-out novel. Generally, I blow off the question
with humor. But the truth is, obviously, I've taken every possible
step to make sure that no one is disappointed. In my case, I've
made sure the story is available somewhere.
_______________________________________________
Notice that here Joe Straczynski calls Babylon 5 a "fully-worked-out novel"
Before the series even started, Joe Straczynski made the point over and over
again that He had been working on the Babylon 5 "five-year arc" in detail
for 10 years or longer. The whole "five-year arc" was triple encryped and
locked away in a safe somewhere.
He also stated that Warner Bros. had given him almost total creative and
production control over the series, which would insure that the viewers
could commit to the series for the whole 5 years and be assured that the
story produced over the 5-year span would be the same one He started
producing in year 1.
In other places and other times, Joe Straczynski stated He had written
"trapdoors" into the plot for all the characters in the "five-year arc" and
for any point in the plot where one or more of them dropped out of the
series.
He always waffled on the question of what would happen to the viewers'
commitment to the series if Babylon 5 was cancelled before the "five-year
arc" had been completed.
_________________________________________________
The trouble, of course, is that unlike writing a novel, where the
characters exist only on a sheet of paper, actors and writers are
some discussion on the best of days). They can get sick, they can
get into contract disputes, they can be hit by meteors, they can
decide to buy a house in Cambridge and raise hedgehogs under an
assumed name. There are, in short, *always* unpredictables in any
such endeavor.
__________________________________________________
And studio executives can issue ultimatums to executive producers that
changes in cast and plot must be made to fix ratings problems, or the series
won't be renewed for another season.
__________________________________________________
Consequently, in drafting the story for Babylon 5, I made sure to
compensate for any possible changes. For lack of a better term,
there is a "trap door" built into the storyline for every character.
Obviously, you don't want to lose anyone, but in *every* case any
such change momentarily shifts the story about ten degrees to one
side for a little bit, and then you're back on track again.
Case in point: Dr. Benjamin Kyle and Lyta Alexander. Here are the
only two humans who have seen or scanned a Vorlon. This is Very
Important to the storyline. Alas, as later events unfolded, things
did not work out, and the characters were dropped...but their story
remained important, in that it was established that they were soon
afterward recalled to Earth under mysterious circumstances (as noted
in "War Prayer"), which actually *helps* the storyline in many ways.
This is not meant to sound callous. As a writer, and as a producer,
it's my job to tell the story, to be responsible, and to make sure
every possible contingency is covered. To do anything less would be
simply irresponsible.
________________________________________________
But dropping Sinclair out of the Babylon 5 after one season is sort of like
dropping Ulysses out of the Odyssey a quarter of way through the journey.
Joe Straczynski takes an interesting change in position here. Prior to this
announcement, He described His job as producer to make sure His "five-year
arc" was produced exactly as he spent 10 years developing..
Now to the beginning of the story.
__________________________________________________
Over the last few weeks, we've been re-activating our cast, making
the deals for the coming season. One aspect of this has been a
series of conversations with Michael O'Hare. Having produced one
full season, and having learned a lot, and having fine-tuned the
"saga" along the way, it was our goal to expand the show, bring in
some new characters, and take the show in some new directions, which
will prove quite interesting, I think. (One sidelight to all this:
now that we've established the series, we'll be able to spend a bit
more time on personal stories, to let our audience learn more about
the characters, particularly the humans, who kinda got short shrift
this season.)
____________________________________________________
Joe Straczynski seems to be saying here that the "five-year arc" He spent 10
years developing in more detail than any other t.v. show in history just
wasn't working and major parts of the "arc" were being scrapped. One can't
"epand the show, bring in some new characters, and take the show in some new
directions" without sacrificing some essential elements of that "five-year
arc." In other words, it ain't the "five-year arc" Joe Straczynski made a
promise _not_ to change.
_____________________________________________________
There is also the question, from an actor's point of view, about
other opportunities, any possible concern about typecasting, the
limitations of a continuing role (and the role of the commander
does have some definite "walls," giving more freedom in many ways
to other characters). Now is the point where one needs to take
a breath and assess one's future, because the deeper we get into
the story, the more problematic it is to change things (though,
again, it's do-able, as noted above).
_______________________________________________________
Yeah, right. An unknown New York actor who's never had a continuing role on
any series is given the lead in one, and he's worried about being typecast.
And then there's all those other opportunities.... Cany anybody name an
opportunity Michael O'Hare gave up by playing the lead in Babylon 5?
_______________________________________________________
As a result of these discussions, it has been agreed that we will
have a separation, in the role of the commander. Let me emphasize
this very clearly, so there is no chance of miscommunication: this
is a mutual, amicable, and friendly separation. This isn't a Tasha
Yar situation. Moreover, we will be handling this in such a way
that, down the road, Sinclair could potentially return to the story.
_______________________________________________________
"Mutual, amicable, and friendly separation" tends to be a code pharase in
the t.v. industry for, "We fired the actor but he chose not to fight about
it in public.
_______________________________________________________
The character of Sinclair will achieve an important destiny, and the
mystery of the Battle of the Line will be explained, both in the
first episode of the new season. His story will still track. And
the series will still track precisely as planned. I take pains to
mention this because both Michael and I want it clear that we both
believe in the show, and want this in no way to interfere with the
series. He has asked me to convey for him his encouragement, his
best wishes, and to emphasize that this is, again, an amicable and
friendly separation.
__________________________________________________________
So now the Odyssey won't be about Ulysses, but about...George.
And Michael O'Hare will be replaced by Bruce Boxleitner. Who didn't seem to
be concerned about being typecast. Just grateful to be cast, period. In
anything.
_________________________________________________________
He has said that he is happy to continue to do the conventions, to
promote the show, because he believes in it, and because he is an
important part of this season's success. We can think of no
finer ambassador for Babylon 5 at conventions than Michael O'Hare.
He is a dynamite speaker, he cares about the fans of the show, and
his compassion shows. We think he's a nifty guy.
_________________________________________________________
Well, convention income is better than no income at all while one develops
all those opportunities.
And if I was an executive producer and could get the lead actor of my series
to roll over like Michael O'Hare did, I would think he was a "nifty guy,"
too.
__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
On our part, we wish Michael only the very best. We know that
he is very much in demand, and look forward to seeing him in other
projects over the next year. This will also allow us to pursue some
new directions avenues for the show that will help to expedite the
overall story. Sinclair disappearing for an indeterminate period
after the events of "Chrysalis" will allow us to tighten the screws
of the story, and heighten the tension of things going on in the
storyline.
____________________________________________________________
Now let's see...what other projects was Michael O'Hare involved in the year
after he quit the role he was worried about being typecast in?
_____________________________________________________________
If I can speak personally for a moment...those of you reading
this on-line know that I've always talked straight with you. If
I thought this in *any* way would interfere with the story, you'd
hear about it from me loud and clear. When problems have arisen in
the past, I've always spoken about them quite bluntly here (much
to the chagrin of some people). This is okay. We're all still
very much friends. I speak frequently to Michael, and consider
him a friend, just as he considers me a friend. This was a hard
decision, but we both knew that it was the right decision, for
very different reasons. We both kinda came to the same place
at the same time from different directions. We've got to do
what's right for the show, and for each other, and in many ways,
this does just that.
_________________________________________________________________
In other words, Warner Bros. made it clear that Michael O'Hare had to be
replaced in the lead and made it clear that Joe Straczynski had to do major
surgery on his beloved "five-year arc" He'd spent 10 years in developing.
So, like politics, being shafted by a major studio makes strange bedfellows.
And "doing what's right for the show" obviously means do whatever is
necessary to get the show renewed for a second season.
__________________________________________________________________
So both we on the show, and Michael are served by this mutual and
amicable separation. We will go our separate ways for now, with
the possibility of meeting Sinclair again down the road a piece,
as Gandalf disappeared for a time into Mordor, only to return when
needed most. (We will also be keeping the character of Sinclair
alive in the comic, and some of the planned novels, to keep that
option available to us.)
There's that code phrase for "firing with no hard feelings" again.
And here seems to be the first indication that Babylon 5 will be "Lord of
the Rings with the serial numbers filed off."
___________________________________________________
Once again, let me emphasize that the story continues on the path
that has been set for it, everything you learn this season sill
obtains, the show remains solid, with all of the other cast members
coming back for a new season, and that the saga of Babylon 5 will
continue to reveal itself exactly as planned. And I hope you will
continue to stay with us for that journey.
_____________________________________________________
But now the show continued on the path Warner Bros. set for it, rather than
the path Joe Straczynski spent 10 years developing.
______________________________________________________
Sincerely,
Joe Straczynski
Creator/Executive Producer
BABYLON 5
_______________________________________________________
Regards,
Theron Fuller
Paul Harper
Oh dear.
That rumbling of hooves on the horizon? That's Fuller approaching
that is. There goes the neighbourhood. Again.
Kill-thread time...
Paul.
--
See Jeri Ryan at Retribution this year: www.supernova-conventions.com
A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
" . . . SFX is a fairly useless publication on just
about every imaginable front. Never have so many jumped-up fanboys done so
little, with so much, for so long." JMS.
JudithPER
>>Why did Sincalir leave after the first season? wah it because of
>>contract disputes or because the actual storyline wrote him out on
>>purpose?
>
>Oh dear.
>
>That rumbling of hooves on the horizon? That's Fuller approaching
>that is. There goes the neighbourhood. Again.
>
>Kill-thread time...
>
>Paul.
Great response - I had a great laugh over that, Paul. <VBG> BTW, have you
noticed that Odie is much less evident lately. Too bad, eh...NOT!
Judith
--
When you have a Golden Retriever, a day without slime is a day without
sunshine.
Alison Hopkins
JudithPER wrote in message <20010313133241...@ng-dh1.aol.com>...
>>Re: Sinclair Leaving From: Paul Harper
>
>>>Why did Sincalir leave after the first season? wah it because of
>>>contract disputes or because the actual storyline wrote him out on
>>>purpose?
>>
>>Oh dear.
>>
>>That rumbling of hooves on the horizon? That's Fuller approaching
>>that is. There goes the neighbourhood. Again.
>>
>>Kill-thread time...
>>
>>Paul.
>
>Great response - I had a great laugh over that, Paul. <VBG> BTW, have you
>noticed that Odie is much less evident lately. Too bad, eh...NOT!
>
It's the glorious predictability of TF that makes it so easy to kill the
thread, innit! And, yes, you-know-who appears to be down to about four a
day, poor baby.
Ali
Iain Clark
"Theron Fuller" <jns-t...@home.com> wrote in message
news:YUer6.173964$B6.38...@news1.rdc1.md.home.com...
>
> Notice that here Joe Straczynski calls Babylon 5 a "fully-worked-out
novel"
> Before the series even started, Joe Straczynski made the point over and
over
> again that He had been working on the Babylon 5 "five-year arc" in detail
> for 10 years or longer. The whole "five-year arc" was triple encryped and
> locked away in a safe somewhere.
>
This is the fundamental flaw in your premise. jms never said that he had
every last detail of the show worked out in advance. He said he had an
overall story worked out in some detail. He's still claiming that five
years later at the end of the series. It didn't change.
Even in this post he's referring to the changes forced on the story by
circumstance. At this point, as he says, he'd already had to replace half
the characters from the pilot. He's also had to introduce the Ambassador's
aides at someone else's suggestion.
A novel is plotted in advance, but it is *not* set in stone. That's not
what the analogy means. No-one who writes novels plans every last twist and
turn. They allow themselves to be surprised by the characters. They run
with what works, and dump the rest. But most writers still get somewhere
close to where they were aiming. Some don't even manage that, for better or
worse. Comparing the five year arc to a novel does not mean it was written
before he started.
You're interpreting what jms said in a way that lets you knock it down.
That's a straw man argument.
Iain
--
"Signs, portents, dreams...next thing
we'll be reading tea leaves and chicken entrails."
Paul Harper
>Great response - I had a great laugh over that, Paul. <VBG> BTW, have you
>noticed that Odie is much less evident lately. Too bad, eh...NOT!
My newsreader doesn't even pick up his headers. Safest way for me -
I'm not at all tempted by anything he may or may not have posted.
To all intents and purposes, he's ceased to exist.
Paul.
--
See Jeri Ryan at the Retribution Convention : www.supernova-conventions.com
Theron Fuller
"Paul Harper" <pa...@harper.netNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:m8pratoff66k0c593...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 09 Mar 2001 19:32:35 -0500, marko <rock...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Why did Sincalir leave after the first season? wah it because of
> >contract disputes or because the actual storyline wrote him out on
> >purpose?
>
> Oh dear.
>
> That rumbling of hooves on the horizon? That's Fuller approaching
> that is. There goes the neighbourhood. Again.
>
> Kill-thread time...
Good! Perhaps if you're not spending so much time trolling and flaming me
you'll have more time to spend with your families.
Regards,
Theron Fuller
Shaz
"Theron Fuller" <jns-t...@home.com> wrote in message
news:YUer6.173964$B6.38...@news1.rdc1.md.home.com...
Took you longer than I thought to pop your head up, Theron. Wondered where
you'd gotten to!
B5 starting again on Sci Fi, Theron posting on his favourite hobby horse...
All's right with the world!
<g>
Shaz
Paul Harper
wrote:
>B5 starting again on Sci Fi, Theron posting on his favourite hobby horse...
... and setting up another losing bet.
Paul Harper
<jns-t...@home.com> wrote:
>Good! Perhaps if you're not spending so much time trolling and flaming me
>you'll have more time to spend with your families.
Good grief - you still stuck in that old groove?
Paul.
--
See Jeri Ryan at the Retribution Convention : www.supernova-conventions.com
Simon Lipscomb-Allhouse
> Good grief - you still stuck in that old groove?
Of course. He's Theron.
---Dr. Simon Lipscomb-Allhouse, Univ. Labs of Physiology. Oxford.----
No-one is completely useless-
They can always serve as a bad example.
Theron Fuller
"Paul Harper" <pa...@harper.netNOSPAM> wrote in message
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2001 02:12:59 GMT, "Theron Fuller"
> <jns-t...@home.com> wrote:
>
> >Good! Perhaps if you're not spending so much time trolling and flaming me
> >you'll have more time to spend with your families.
>
> Good grief - you still stuck in that old groove?
Well, so much for being killfiled.
Can drunken sweet nothings from Ali be far behind?
Theron Fuller
Theron Fuller
"Shaz" <hyp...@Dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:98mno8$62p$1...@lure.pipex.net...
Been here pretty much all along.
How's the job hunt going?
Regards,
Theron Fuller
Simon Lipscomb-Allhouse
>
> You're interpreting what jms said in a way that lets you knock it down.
> That's a straw man argument.
Of course. He's Theron.
Alison Hopkins
Theron Fuller wrote in message ...
And that, after I sincerely complimented you on paying up on your bet. I
meant what I said, Theron, you behaved honourably on that, and it's a shame
you have to spoil the effect of a decent act.
Ali
Iain Clark
"Simon Lipscomb-Allhouse" <simon.l...@physiol.ox.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3AAF63D4...@physiol.ox.ac.uk...
> Iain Clark wrote:
>
> >
> > You're interpreting what jms said in a way that lets you knock it down.
> > That's a straw man argument.
>
> Of course. He's Theron.
>
Theron Fuller
"Simon Lipscomb-Allhouse" <simon.l...@physiol.ox.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3AAF63D4...@physiol.ox.ac.uk...
>
> >
> > You're interpreting what jms said in a way that lets you knock it down.
> > That's a straw man argument.
And all the time I thought I was knocking down some of Joe Straczynski's
straw men.
>
> Of course. He's Theron.
Does anyone ever call you "Simple Simon?"
Regards,
Theron Fuller
Iain Clark
> "Simon Lipscomb-Allhouse" <simon.l...@physiol.ox.ac.uk> wrote in
message
> news:3AAF63D4...@physiol.ox.ac.uk...
> > Iain Clark wrote:
> > >
> > > You're interpreting what jms said in a way that lets you knock it
down.
> > > That's a straw man argument.
>
> And all the time I thought I was knocking down some of Joe Straczynski's
> straw men.
> >
Okay, let me try this one. Here's a jms post from before the first season
even aired, long before Sinclair's leaving came up, and nearly a full year
before the '94 post you
quoted. He's talking about the cast changes between pilot and series.
"Subject: Hi, all, was out of state for a...
From: STRACZYNSKI [Joe]
Date: 07/24/1993 08:13 AM
Forum: Genie
Hi, all, was out of state for a few days, just got back and am catching
up. Re: story alterations in changing cast...won't be any. The basic layout
remains the same, only a few small pieces get rearranged in terms of the
overall 5-year arc. We get to the same place in the end.
This is very much what happens in a novel, having written a few: y ou
start out with X characters, and at some point discover that you need to
skew things to or away from certain characters once you get into it. Same
thing here.
...
jms"
Hardly the words of someone claiming everything was set in stone, and this
disproves your claim that he had an "interesting change in position" towards
the flexibility of the arc or the characters later on. So there you go.
> > Of course. He's Theron.
>
> Does anyone ever call you "Simple Simon?"
>
Why, do you feel a strange urge to listen to him?
Theron Fuller
"Iain Clark" <iainj...@dragonhaven.worldonline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:98p11e$30aki$1...@ID-36593.news.dfncis.de...
But there's a vast difference between switching the actor who plays the
doctor between the pilot and the first season, and the actor who plays the
telepath between the pilot and the first season and completely eliminating
the lead character of the series and replacing him with another lead
character.
In the first instance, all you have to do is make some minor story
adjustments to integrate two new characters into exactly the same roles in
the plot as the discarded characters. In the second instance, Joe
Straczynski has gone from saying something like, "The Story of Babylon 5 is
the story of Sinclair" to saying that Babylon 5 isn't about Sinclair at all.
There's also a world of difference between changing characters you've barely
introduced in the pilot, to changing the lead character after a whole season
of character and story development.
And you seem to be saying that Joe Straczynski is such a poor writer that
after spending ten years developing the story, the plot and the characters
of Babylon 5 He couldn't see that the lead character "wasn't going to work"
until He had produced a whole season of the series.
You can't have it both ways. You can't say that Joe Straczynski is this
creative genius who masterminded this "five-year arc" of a series, and at
the same time believe Him when He says He painted Himself into such a
creative corner in the first season He had to replace the main character to
correct the problem.
> > > Of course. He's Theron.
> >
> > Does anyone ever call you "Simple Simon?"
> >
>
> Why, do you feel a strange urge to listen to him?
No, I was just musing online about a seeming lack of elegance in his trolls,
is all.
Regards,
Theron Fuller
Simon Lipscomb-Allhouse
>
> "Theron Fuller" ?jns-t...@home.com? wrote in message
> ?
> ? Does anyone ever call you "Simple Simon?"
> ?
LOL! Playground insults? Ouch, I'm cut to the quick!
Oddly enough Theron, no, nobody does call me that. Not even when I was
five years old. Given that I have a doctorate from Oxford University it
wouldn't *quite* apply in any case, unless used in (a) an ironic sense
or (b) meaning uncomplicated.
Dear oh dear. Simple Simon.
Well, I should be honoured. At least I now have my own amusing Theron
nickname. I'm no longer merely a faceless member of the Brit Wit Twits.
What a comedic buffoon you are.
Paul Harper
<jns-t...@home.com> wrote:
>
>"Paul Harper" <pa...@harper.netNOSPAM> wrote in message
>news:9e5uatg6lvpq7hhtn...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 14 Mar 2001 02:12:59 GMT, "Theron Fuller"
>> <jns-t...@home.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Good! Perhaps if you're not spending so much time trolling and flaming me
>> >you'll have more time to spend with your families.
>>
>> Good grief - you still stuck in that old groove?
>
>Well, so much for being killfiled.
You haven't been killfiled in recent months. It's odeus that's in the
kill file. I keep you around because you amuse me whereas he's simply
boring.
You have a simpleton's charm and predictability that is child-like in
it's innocent belief that you are in any way, by any person, being
taken seriously.
You're cute.
You're an old toy.
You're easy meat.
P.C. Kilinskas
<norv...@sirius.com> wrote:
>In article <98p11e$30aki$1...@ID-36593.news.dfncis.de>, "Iain Clark"
><iainj...@dragonhaven.worldonline.co.uk> wrote:
>> "Theron Fuller" <jns-t...@home.com> wrote in message
>> news:MrSr6.178549$B6.39...@news1.rdc1.md.home.com...
>[...] >>>Of course. He's Theron.
>>>Does anyone ever call you "Simple Simon?"
>
>forehead> ... silly me, this is *Theron* we're talking about. ;-)
He's been called a lot, but my personal favorite is "Theron Fullofit". :)
Phil
Pål Are Nordal
>
> ("Trapdoors" of
> this kind are not unique. Read Neil Gaiman's comments about plotting his
> Sandman comic series).
Ahh, but Neil's friend of jms' and obviously in on it.
Iain Clark
>
> "Iain Clark" <iainj...@dragonhaven.worldonline.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:98p11e$30aki$1...@ID-36593.news.dfncis.de...
> > This is very much what happens in a novel, having written a few: y ou
> > start out with X characters, and at some point discover that you need to
> > skew things to or away from certain characters once you get into it.
Same
> > thing here.
> > ...
> > jms"
> But there's a vast difference between switching the actor who plays the
> doctor between the pilot and the first season, and the actor who plays the
> telepath between the pilot and the first season and completely eliminating
> the lead character of the series and replacing him with another lead
> character.
>
All well and good, but you said that jms changed his tune about how 'set in
stone' the arc was. I refuted it with evidence to the contrary. Seems
pretty clear to me.
> You can't have it both ways. You can't say that Joe Straczynski is this
> creative genius who masterminded this "five-year arc" of a series, and at
> the same time believe Him when He says He painted Himself into such a
> creative corner in the first season He had to replace the main character
to
> correct the problem.
>
Well, I can see from the series that he's a very creative individual. I
know for a fact that he masterminded all five years of the series. So no
problem there.
I also know that all writers change their minds and adapt to circumstances,
no matter how carefully they plan. I know that this is a fundamental part
of doing a story in any medium, but especially on television where all sorts
of real world obstacles stand in the way of your plans. I'd go so far as to
say it's a huge part of the achievement.
And I know that jms in particular has freely admitted changing all sorts of
elements of the series to get to his planned destination. ("Trapdoors" of
this kind are not unique. Read Neil Gaiman's comments about plotting his
Sandman comic series). jms can demonstrate that he deftly adapted to
circumstance in ways that show far more creativity that sticking slavishly
to a plan. He demonstrated the ability to learn from his experiences and
use them to improve the series. He also made mistakes, left plot-holes, and
wrote some real clunkers. But overall he also ended up *close enough* to
where he planned that all the foreshadowing and thematic content still works
superbly. All told it's an astonishing achievement.
Where in any of this is a contradiction?
It seems to me that you're desperately trying to 'prove' a small piece of
ancient history that is unsupported by any facts and irrelevant to either
enjoying the series, or appreciating the skills of the writer. You're like
a conspiracy theorist lost in the small details and unable to step back and
look at the big picture.
The very fact that you think proving it would make any difference speaks
volumes. If after 7 odd years you haven't managed to convince a single
other person that their enjoyment of this television series is somehow an
aberration... maybe we just have different opinions?