Instinct or Player Knowledge?
A little explanation on the title up there. Player Knowledge is a term common in role playing games that refers to a player acting on knowledge he has but his character should not. What this has to do with serials is an interesting minor aspect I have noticed in some serials, mostly westerns, where the hero or sidekick will immediately exhibit animosity toward the villain who is passing themself off as a friend of the hero and no one has reason to suspect that he is really the one behind the trouble. Prime examples include Lon Chaney, Jr. and Noah Berry, Jr. both being immediately suspicious of Noah Berry, Sr. in Overland Mail (1942), Edgar Kennedy acting antagonistic to both Harry Cording and Martin Kosleck from the get go in The Great Alaskan Mystery (1944), and Raymond Hatton’s immediate dislike of James Craven in White Eagle (1941). If the villain is supposed to be as clever as he is represented, the heroes shouldn’t have any inkling of his double dealing till towards the end. Is this bad writing or bad acting? I don’t think so as the people involved are too talented for such an accusation. Which means it is intentional. Why? The only reason I can think of is that since the audience already knows of the villain’s true intentions, the heroes are a reflection of the viewers own feelings toward the character. Maybe I’m try to read a little too much into what was essentially considered to be light entertainment, but it is these little things that continue to make serials so fascinating to me.
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment