Here’s a question for playwrights and screenwriters. It’s become so easy to find the answers to the most esoteric, exotic, and sordid questions, thanks to the Internet and the disappearance of the idea that anything is off limits in polite society. So is it becoming more awkward to convey information to a theater or movie audience by having a seemingly intelligent character ask dumb questions?
I ask because I just started watching the TV series Damages (only two episodes so far, so I don’t yet know if I like it or will ultimately find the thriller spin on The Devil Wears Prada to be a cheat). In one scene, Glenn Close, playing a whip-smart lawyer who’s obviously familiar with the seamiest aspects of human nature, is baffled by a charge on her son’s credit card statement and has to ask her husband what an “outcall” is. She does this even though she’s sitting in her office and could easily Google the term in the unlikely event she’s never heard of it. (You can do it, too. I know damn well that you’re on your computer.)
Maybe I’m being nitpicky, and I know that sometimes you have to explain things to audiences this way, but the moment did come close to breaking the fourth wall for me. It was as if Close had turned into Diane Sawyer or some other newsmagazine host and was asking someone to define a sexual term “for our audience.” This kind of thing happens on a lot of crime shows, including E.C. favorite Law & Order, where a jaded cop might be unfamiliar with something like craigslist.
Is this a consideration in writing drama these days, or is the temporarily naïve character a device that’s too valuable to lose?
Do moments like the one on Damages argue for more voice-overs, corny as they are, so that smart characters can just tell the audience directly what's what?
