because to be a writer means to always improve

It’s important to always be aiming for more in terms of representation.

But it’s equally important to realise that not everything has to reach a standard of perfection to be valuable.

Some better indicators of performance would be “improvement of the show/writer over the course of a few years” (because always seeking to improve is important) or “representation compared to the average” (because it’s important to push boundaries and be brave in your choices). I mean obviously representation isn’t quantifiable, but it would still be possible with enough discussion to determine those indicators.

And any improvement or any representation about the average would be a good thing, with significant improvement or significantly above average would be an even better thing.

And the idea that if the representation is not as good as the very best available/imaginable that means it holds no value is complete rubbish, and we need to stop using it.

Based on Twitter, I take it that TPTB at @cw_spn are trotting out the “story goes where it goes” excuse again. 

As a writer this bullshit infuriates me, because a good writer, like improv comedians or jazz musicians, always maintains structural control over their material. Dropping control means you’re not doing your job.

And yes, sometimes a new and interesting turn appears. Things change, characters evolve, contracts aren’t renewed, etc etc.  But you then make the minute and constant adjustments so that the new direction maintains internal consistency (ex: a smart character isn’t suddenly suicidally stupid without cause), and the end result is the destination you planned.  

And then you own it, you don’t blame it on some vague “story wanted” as though it has more power over your words than you do.

Because no, that’s not how it works.  Not if you’re a professional.