You're still treating both the events of the story and the manner in which it's told as if they're immutable. They are not. This is fiction. If either a story event or a storytelling angle doesn't work, it can be changed at the author's command.
I only gave Annika's perspective as an example, but plenty of good trial stories have been told from the lawyer's point of view. There's even 12 Angry Men which is from the jury's point of view and there are no other characters, but it's a great story. The same events told with the boy on trial for murder as the main character would be a very different kind of story.
Same goes for a story with, as you suggest, a passive central character. There are such stories, but they're not action-adventure thrillers with the central character trying desperately to clear themselves.
You become reduced to claiming the author intended the effects I'm criticizing. Deliberately choosing bad storytelling techniques is no excuse.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2021-03-15 03:59 pm (UTC)I only gave Annika's perspective as an example, but plenty of good trial stories have been told from the lawyer's point of view. There's even 12 Angry Men which is from the jury's point of view and there are no other characters, but it's a great story. The same events told with the boy on trial for murder as the main character would be a very different kind of story.
Same goes for a story with, as you suggest, a passive central character. There are such stories, but they're not action-adventure thrillers with the central character trying desperately to clear themselves.
You become reduced to claiming the author intended the effects I'm criticizing. Deliberately choosing bad storytelling techniques is no excuse.