In another thread, I asked if I could leave a plot point ambiguous, because there were other works that didn't explain their logic. Examples I used included Toy Story (why do the toys come to life?), Calvin and Hobbes (is Hobbes real, or just in Calvin's imagination?), and Frozen (where did Elsa's powers come from?). At least two people replied with "Those are cartoons" or something along those lines, and I have something to say to that: WHAT. THE. FUCK. So, let me get something straight here: these works are allowed to leave things ambiguous just because they're of a different medium? Live-action works have to explain things, but animated ones don't? I don't get that logic. It's stupid and makes no sense. Can someone please explain to me why cartoons can leave things ambiguous, but live-action works and novels can't?
Dear Rick n Morty, Please stop being so sensitive on the internet. Stop worrying about what other people have to say. I can't remember a single thread you've posted that didn't cause you distress. Stop asking questions if you don't like the answers. People gave you their opinions. If you don't like them, don't accept them. It's really that simple. No one is telling you they are the ultimate authority on all things writing. You asked for opinions, you got them. You also got encouraging feedback in that thread. So why are you here complaining about it? Sincerely, A Concerned Citizen
I don't understand what point you are trying to make. Live-action media leaves a lot of things ambiguous as well. Elyisum doesn't explain the inner workings of its exoskeleton suits and AI. James Cameron's avatar doesn't explain the biology of Pandora's flora and fauna. Hunger Games never gives a good explanation as to its reasoning behind the titular hunger games. Robocop doesn't explain the science behind the cybernetic police officer's prosthetics. The list could go on, but it'd be redundant at that point.
Each fictional universe has its own laws and you either accept them or don't. The only thing that matters is whether the author applies the rules he made up consistently. I'm not familiar with the other 'cartoon logic' examples you cited, but as far as Calvin and Hobbes is concerned, this is definitely the case. Hobbes is alive to Calvin, but to anyone else, he appears as a usual stuffed tiger. Bill Watterson hasn't broken this rule even once.
Doesn't make sense to you* Just because you don't understand it doesn't make it wrong or a personal attack on you. And that works the other way around, too. But I've said all of this to you before, so I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time. Good luck!
Could have something to do with the fact that animation is generally regarded as 'for kids' and it's assumed kids aren't going to care about plot holes and inconsistencies and don't have to try nearly as hard to suspend disbelief, whereas live action shows/movies of a certain rating and YA+ novels are generally intended for viewers/readers who pay more attention and care more about reason. As @PilotMobius points out, all fantastical settings have their own rules and caveats and things they expect you to accept. Both are fantastical, but a future where we can turn a guy named Murphy into a cyborg death machine is (or was, in the 80s) a more believable premise than all toys actually being alive. "We have the technology" is just as handwavey as "they're alive for no reason", but it can stand up to a bit more criticism. Cartoon logic says eh, don't think about it too hard. Which is fine. But if you're writing for adults and you want them to engage, you need to give them something to engage with, not tell them not to think about it too hard. Probably should've taken it up with the people who said it at the time, though, and asked them to clarify, rather than asking the forum at large some time after the fact and with a confrontational attitude.
Your rule of thumb for any device, action, conversation is always: Does it get you where you want to go? If it does, it's right. It doesn't matter what anyone else says about it. Nothing succeeds like success. However, the same is true for the opposite. If it doesn't, then admit that to yourself and move along. As far as toys coming alive. That's doable because what child hasn't imagined all their toys coming to life? As far as is Hobbes real? He intentionally leaves that to your imagination to give his comic strip its characteristic quality. Where does "she" get her powers in Frozen? I assumed we've seen so many of these magical mystery musicals the creator can safely assume you'll select your own rationale in your now very wealthy vault of "whys and hows of fictional super powers and magical traits." Yeah...cliche is what it is.
