And a belated "thank you," which I swear I remembered doing before! *blush*

I wonder if Schanke worries that Nick will burn himself out, taking things so seriously, and so hard? Someone should worry.

I absolutely think he does.

I do love the lantern-hang about parking. :-)

What matters is just knowing that Nick is having a flashback, because that tells us that we're in an episode structure, even was low on ideas and pressed for though we can see only as much as Schanke sees.

The notion of an obvious flashback that's never spelled out for the reader simply because it's Schanke's pov is just such a delight. In hindsight, it seems kind of obvious, and yet I don't think I've seen anyone else do it.

I love an author who checks historical references for a one-off line. And Nat would have her facts straight before correcting someone else's.

Alas, if only the criminal element would restrain itself to poison to coddle his delicate sensibilities--"

I can hear and see the delivery on this so clearly. Schanke-isms indeed!

Does Nick say somewhere in canon that he hates notifying the families of murder victims?

I can't remember whether he does, but I'm almost positive Schanke does. I can't quite hear the line or place the circumstances, but there's a "Man oh man" in there somewhere.

Trying to move the story along, skimming past actions that don't contribute directly. Does it wander too far into telling instead of showing?

Nope. Just keeps you from getting bogged down.

we never had an eating-disorder episode; I keep meaning to write one, but it's such delicate territory)

This figured into one of my novel proposals. Probably a bit predictable in having the young lady in question be a student ballerina, but I knew the lay of the land.

but did you know there's actually a bare chest scene before "Night in Question"? First-season, tarot cards, loft floor, robe open.

Y'know, I've always been too busy giggling at his obviously trying to hit the camera with them. I registered the costuming (natch -- the day I don't do that in general, you'll know my brain has stopped working entirely), but not that particular significance.

Could be evoking Lisa Cooper from "Father Figure," who obliquely compares Nick to Superman (she asks if the loft is his Fortress of Solitude). Or could just be my own Marvel Comics fandom.

Or Schanke's, if only from when he was a kid. He did seem to get on Lisa's wavelength in that regard pretty easily.

Am I suggesting that the boys were on marijuana by sending Ken for a big bag of fast food, given its famous hunger-inducing effects? Not intentionally.

FWIW, I gave it a brief thought and decided against it, opting for the (actually more obvious) explanation that they're teenage boys. All the other circumstances in play argue against pot.

Actually, it's almost precisely the same. And Nick knows it.

Yup.

Food metaphors in FK were never adequately explored.

Very true. Especially considering it was the elephant in the room every time (mostly first season) Natalie harped on abstinence from blood. Which she seems to me to have done most when she was running low on other ideas. That she persisted in doing so after seeing the condition he wound up in in DK2 is bewildering, and all I've ever been able to think is that the writers were determinedly ignoring the food angle to press the addiction one. Result: Huge honkin' elephant in the room.

Edited at 2008-05-25 08:31 pm (UTC)

>"And a belated "thank you," which I swear I remembered doing before! *blush*"

I know you're very busy, so I wasn't thinking you were "overdue," or anything! Thank you.

>"The notion of an obvious flashback that's never spelled out for the reader simply because it's Schanke's pov is just such a delight. In hindsight, it seems kind of obvious, and yet I don't think I've seen anyone else do it."

I'm sure others must have done it with Schanke and Tracy alike, but I don't recall any offhand. I do recall scenes in which Natalie notices Nick having a flashback and asks him about it -- sometimes he tells her (and the reader), but sometimes he doesn't.

>"I love an author who checks historical references for a one-off line."

Thanks! Trying to avoid those Battle of Hastings wall-of-shame entries. :-)

>"This [eating disorders] figured into one of my novel proposals. Probably a bit predictable in having the young lady in question be a student ballerina, but I knew the lay of the land."

That would have been very interesting and worthwhile! Still would be, if you're ever so moved.

>"Y'know, I've always been too busy giggling at his obviously trying to hit the camera with them. I registered the costuming (natch -- the day I don't do that in general, you'll know my brain has stopped working entirely), but not that particular significance."

Since noting the tarot bare-chest scene, I've noticed among my downloaded, screen-saver-ized Knight Watchman stills a similar bare-chest scene with the chess set, doubtless from that same session of shooting all that mooning-around-the-loft filler footage. I wouldn't have taken note, but I rewatched "Night in Question" a while ago when I was very tired, and remembered people trying diligently to oogle that scene in the hospital, as if it were the only such they had (which it might have been, knowing the US versions of first season).

As I keep telling tv_elf, I'm oogling-impaired. :-) It's taken me all these years to notice his robe was open, but I could have happily discussed the symbolism of the cards and chess set and mooning about from the very beginning!

>"That she persisted in doing so after seeing the condition he wound up in in DK2 is bewildering, and all I've ever been able to think is that the writers were determinedly ignoring the food angle to press the addiction one. Result: Huge honkin' elephant in the room."

Yes, addiction was so clearly the metaphor of choice that it even appears as a prop in other metaphors (cf. "Dying for Fame"). leela_cat also finds the insistence on abstinence post-DK2 a tremendous stumbling block in her acceptance of Natalie's science. I wonder more and more whether DK2 isn't the aberration, rather than the rest of the series. Alyce, for example, clearly did not work out as originally intended; is Nick's condition and Natalie's treatment of it there also a leftover from Nick Knight or otherwise part of a premise that got swept under a rug?

But I do know better than to look for continuity in FK that we didn't put there ourselves. ;-)

Thank you again for reading the story, and for asking about it!